Document Detail

Interactions between genetic variants in the adiponectin, adiponectin receptor 1 and environmental factors on the risk of colorectal cancer.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22087284     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome traits play an important role in the development of colorectal cancer. Adipokines, key metabolic syndrome cellular mediators, when abnormal, may induce carcinogenesis.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To investigate whether polymorphisms of important adipokines, adiponectin (ADIPOQ) and its receptors, either alone or in combination with environmental factors, are implicated in colorectal cancer, a two-stage case-control study was conducted. In the first stage, we evaluated 24 tag single nucleotide polymorphisms (tag SNPs) across ADIPOQ ligand and two ADIPOQ receptors (ADIPOR1 and ADIPOR2) among 470 cases and 458 controls. One SNP with promising association was then analyzed in stage 2 among 314 cases and 355 controls. In our study, ADIPOQ rs1063538 was consistently associated with increased colorectal cancer risk, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.94 (95%CI: 1.48-2.54) for CC genotype compared with TT genotype. In two-factor gene-environment interaction analyses, rs1063538 presented significant interactions with smoking status, family history of cancer and alcohol use, with ORs of 4.52 (95%CI: 2.78-7.34), 3.18 (95%CI: 1.73-5.82) and 1.97 (95%CI: 1.27-3.04) for smokers, individuals with family history of cancer or drinkers with CC genotype compared with non-smokers, individuals without family history of cancer or non-drinkers with TT genotype, respectively. Multifactor gene-environment interactions analysis revealed significant interactions between ADIPOQ rs1063538, ADIPOR1 rs1539355, smoking status and BMI. Individuals carrying one, two and at least three risk factors presented 1.18-fold (95%CI:0.89-fold to 1.58-fold), 1.87-fold (95%CI: 1.38-fold to 2.54-fold) and 4.39-fold (95%CI: 2.75-fold to 7.01-fold) increased colorectal cancer risk compared with those who without risk factor, respectively (P(trend) <0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results suggest that variants in ADIPOQ may contribute to increased colorectal cancer risk in Chinese and this contribution may be modified by environmental factors, such as smoking status, family history of cancer and BMI.
Authors:
Li Liu; Rong Zhong; Sheng Wei; Jie-Yun Yin; Hao Xiang; Li Zou; Wei Chen; Ji-Gui Chen; Xia-Wen Zheng; Li-Juan Huang; Bei-Bei Zhu; Quan Chen; Sheng-Yu Duan; Rui Rui; Bei-Fang Yang; Jing-Wen Sun; Duo-Shuang Xie; Yi-Hua Xu; Xiao-Ping Miao; Shao-Fa Nie
Related Documents :
21706194 - Quality of life among immigrant latina breast cancer survivors: realities of culture an...
22875264 - Helping the clinician help me: towards listening in cancer care.
21826084 - The current landscape of locally advanced rectal cancer.
21775534 - New strategies in overcoming acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor ty...
21233964 - Fecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer.
12527564 - Prevention of lung cancer: summary of published evidence.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2011-11-07
Journal Detail:
Title:  PloS one     Volume:  6     ISSN:  1932-6203     ISO Abbreviation:  PLoS ONE     Publication Date:  2011  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2011-11-17     Completed Date:  2012-05-18     Revised Date:  2013-06-27    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101285081     Medline TA:  PLoS One     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  e27301     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and the Ministry of Education Key Lab of Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adiponectin / genetics*
Body Mass Index
Case-Control Studies
China / epidemiology
Colorectal Neoplasms / etiology*,  genetics
Family
Female
Gene-Environment Interaction*
Genetic Predisposition to Disease
Genotype
Humans
Male
Metabolic Syndrome X / complications
Middle Aged
Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide*
Receptors, Adiponectin / genetics*
Risk Factors
Smoking
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
0/ADIPOR1 protein, human; 0/Adiponectin; 0/Receptors, Adiponectin
Comments/Corrections

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): PLoS One
Journal ID (publisher-id): plos
Journal ID (pmc): plosone
ISSN: 1932-6203
Publisher: Public Library of Science, San Francisco, USA
Article Information
Download PDF
Liu et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received Day: 5 Month: 7 Year: 2011
Accepted Day: 13 Month: 10 Year: 2011
collection publication date: Year: 2011
Electronic publication date: Day: 7 Month: 11 Year: 2011
Volume: 6 Issue: 11
E-location ID: e27301
ID: 3210156
PubMed Id: 22087284
Publisher Id: PONE-D-11-12544
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301

Interactions between Genetic Variants in the Adiponectin, Adiponectin Receptor 1 and Environmental Factors on the Risk of Colorectal Cancer Alternate Title:Adiponectin and Its Receptor in Colorectal Cancer
Li Liu1
Rong Zhong1
Sheng Wei1
Jie-Yun Yin1
Hao Xiang2
Li Zou1
Wei Chen1
Ji-Gui Chen3
Xia-Wen Zheng1
Li-Juan Huang1
Bei-Bei Zhu1
Quan Chen1
Sheng-Yu Duan1
Rui Rui1
Bei-Fang Yang1
Jing-Wen Sun1
Duo-Shuang Xie14
Yi-Hua Xu1
Xiao-Ping Miao1*
Shao-Fa Nie1*
Takeo Yoshikawaedit1 Role: Editor
1Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and the Ministry of Education Key Lab of Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
2Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
3Department of Surgery, The Eighth Hospital of Wuhan, Wuhan, Hubei, China
4Department of Infection Control, Taihe Hospital, Yunyang Medical College, Shiyan, Hubei, China
Rikagaku Kenkyūsho Brain Science Institute, Japan
Correspondence: * E-mail: sf_nie@mails.tjmu.edu.cn (S-FN); miaoxp@mail.hust.edu.cn (X-PM)
Contributed by footnote: Conceived and designed the experiments: SN XM. Performed the experiments: LL RZ JY LZ WC XZ LH BZ QC SD RR JS. Analyzed the data: LL SW HX BY YX. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: HX JC DX. Wrote the paper: LL XM SN.

Introduction

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality, accounting for an estimated 1, 330, 000 new cases and 608, 000 cancer deaths in 2008 worldwide [1]. Colorectal cancer has been long prevalent in western populations and was estimated to cause 142, 570 new cases and 51, 370 cancer deaths in Unite State in 2010 [2]. In the past decades, the incidence rate of colorectal cancer increased remarkably in China. For example, developed area in China such as Shanghai experienced an annual increase of 4.2% in colorectal cancer incidence, which was even significantly higher than the average increase of 2% worldwide during the past twenty years [3].

Although the causation of colorectal cancer has not been completely understood, epidemiological studies found that western dietary and behavior patterns, such as high fat, low fiber intake and deficiency of physical activity, were the main reason for increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in developing countries. The metabolic syndrome, a consequence of western dietary and behavior patterns and characterized by obesity, insulin resistance and hypertension, was subsequently demonstrated to contribute to colorectal cancer risk [4], [5], [6]. Epidemiological studies have reported an increased risk of colorectal cancer in obese individuals compared with normal weight individuals [7], [8]. Similarly, markers of insulin resistance, such as high circulation levels of C-peptide and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 1(IGFBP-1), were showed to be directly associated with colorectal cancer risk [9], [10]. Meanwhile, the observation of an ecologic correlation between adipokines secretion disorders and metabolic syndrome traits, has spawned a number of epidemiological studies of the association between important adipokines, especially between adiponectin (ADIPOQ) and its receptors (ADIPORs) with obesity and insulin resistance, which showed that circulating ADIPOQ level was significantly negatively, whereas ADIPORs level was positively, associated with metabolic syndrome traits [11], [12].

Given the association between metabolic syndrome traits and colorectal cancer risk and the key role of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes in the development of obesity and insulin resistance, emerging interest was focused on the role of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes in colorectal carcinogenesis. In vitro, ADIPOQ presented the tendency of growth inhibition and apoptosis induction in colorectal cancer cell lines [13]. In vivo, mice with disruptions in serum ADIPOQ developed more intestinal tumors [14]. Recently, several lines of evidence have demonstrated the inverse association between serum ADIPOQ and colorectal cancer risk [15], [16], [17]. In a prospective, nested case-control study, men in the highest ADIPOQ quintile were found to have a 68% lower risk of colorectal cancer compared with men in the lowest quintile (relative risk [RR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23–0.78)[18]. The anticancer role of ADIPOQ was mainly induced by its receptors, which have been demonstrated to repress colon cancer cell lines (including HCT116, HT29 and LoVo) proliferation via ADIPOR1- and -R2-mediated 5′-AMP -activated protein kinase (AMPK). Furthermore, knockdown of ADIPORs could relieve the suppressive effect of ADIPOQ on the growth of colon cancer cells [19]. In addition, overexpression of ADIPORs could activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-a (PPAR-a), which was reported to play a role in inhibition of FAS and activation of epidermal growth factor receptor family to promote cancer formation [20], [21]. Moreover, recent epidemiological studies have also detected elevated expression of ADIPORs in colorectal carcinomas than in normal gastrointestinal tissue [22].

Several polymorphisms in ADIPOQ and its receptor genes have been demonstrated to influence the expression of these genes and subsequent cancer risk [23], [24], [25]. Kaklamani et al. showed that some polymorphisms of the ADIPOQ and its receptor genes were associated with breast cancer [26], prostate cancer [27] and colorectal cancer [28] risk in Caucasian. However, to date, these have been few studies addressing the role of genetic variants in ADIPOQ and its receptor genes as cancer susceptibility factors in Chinese population. Therefore, we performed a two-stage case-control study to systemically evaluate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes as a predictor of colorectal cancer risk in Chinese population.


Results
Characteristics of the study population

Table 1 lists the characteristics of individuals included in the two-stage case-control study. There were no significant differences in the distribution of age, sex, alcohol use and BMI between cases and controls in either stage. The median age was 58 years old (interquartile range, 48–67 years old) and 56 years old (interquartile range, 46–67 years old) in controls in the first and second stage, respectively, compared with 58 yeas old (interquartile range, 51–67 years old) and 59 yeas old (interquartile range, 49–68 years old) in cases, respectively. More smokers were observed in cases than in controls (odds ratio [OR] = 1.95, 95%CI: 1.56–2.45 in combined analysis). In addition, more cases possessed family history of cancer in both case-control studies (OR = 1.78, 95%CI: 1.34–2.38 in combined analysis).

Risk associated with individual SNP

Since 2 SNPs in ADIPOR1 and 1 SNP in ADIPOR2 were failed in the design of PCR primers in the first stage, a total of 24 tag SNPs in ADIPOQ and its receptor genes were analyzed and therefore, the cut-off point of P value was set as 0.002 for multi-comparison in the first stage. All SNPs fitted the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium among controls. The frequency of T allele was 0.55 and 0.54 in controls in the first and second stage, compared with 0.46 and 0.46 in cases, respectively. In the first stage, 1 potential association was found (P<0.001). The ADIPOQ rs1063538 CC genotype was associated with increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 1.94 (95%CI: 1.37–2.74) compared with TT genotype. In the validation study (Stage 2), the rs1063538 was also associated with increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 1.91 (95%CI: 1.23–2.95) for CC vs. TT genotype. Combined analysis of the 2 studies showed that rs1063538 was significantly associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. Individuals carrying rs1063538 CC genotype or C allele presented 1.94–fold (95%CI: 1.48–fold to 2.54–fold) and 1.79–fold (95%CI: 1.43–fold to 2.25–fold) increased colorectal cancer risk compared with those whose carried TT genotype, respectively (Table 2). To test the statistical power of our sample size, we calculated the power to detect an OR of 1.90 at the first error of 0.002 in two-sided test by using a prevalence of 0.55 (prevalence of T allele of rs1063538 in controls). The results were as follow: combined study, power = 0.99; Stage 1, power = 0.94; and Stage 2, power = 0.81. Results for non-significant SNPs are displayed in Table S1.

Two-factor gene-environment interaction and subgroup analyses

To explore the potential interactions between ADIPOQ rs1063538 and BMI, smoking status, alcohol use and family history of cancer, we performed two-factor gene-environment interaction analyses by Logistic Regression in combined population. The results are displayed in Table 3. Smokers carrying CC genotype significantly increased colorectal cancer risk when compared with non-smokers carrying TT genotype, with an OR of 4.52 (95%CI: 2.78–7.34). Individuals with family history of cancer harboring CC genotype was also associated with significantly increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 3.18 (95%CI: 1.73–5.82) compared with individuals without family history of cancer carrying TT genotype. Alcohol users with CC genotype presented 1.97–fold (95%CI: 1.27–fold to 3.04–fold) increased colorectal cancer risk compared with never drinkers carrying TT genotype. We also carried out stratified analyses for ADIPOQ rs1063538 to explore the role of the polymorphism in different subgroup population. In never smokers, CC genotype significantly increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 1.74 (95%CI: 1.26–2.40) in comparison with TT genotype. Individuals without family history of cancer harboring CC genotype of rs1063538 exhibited a significantly increased risk for colorectal cancer, with an OR of 1.95 (95%CI: 1.44–2.65) compared with TT genotype. In never alcohol users, CC genotype significantly increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 1.87 (95%CI: 1.35–2.58) when compared with TT genotype. Moreover, in subgroup of BMI<25 kg/m2, individuals with CC genotype of rs1063538 was significantly associated with increased colorectal cancer risk, with an OR of 2.05 (95%CI: 1.45–2.90) compared with individuals carrying TT genotype (Table 4).

Multifactor gene-environment interactions by Classification and Regression Trees

We used the data in the first stage to widely explore the potential gene-environment interactions by using Classification and Regression Trees (CART). In the CART analysis, the initial split of the root node was smoking status, and ever smokers had much higher cancer prevalence than never smokers (P<0.05), suggesting that smoking status was the strongest factor in colorectal cancer susceptibility. Further inspection of classification tree structure consistently indicated ADIPOQ rs1063538 was the strongest split, regardless of smoking status. The combination of ever smoking and rs1063538 CC genotype exhibited the highest risk of colorectal cancer, with a 82.4% patient rate, whereas the combination of never smoking and rs1063538 T allele presented the lowest risk of colorectal cancer, with a 41.4% patient rate. In ever smokers carrying rs1063538 T allele, ADIPOR1 rs1539355 was the strongest effect associated factor, and the combination of ever smoking, rs1063538 T allele and rs1539355 G allele exhibited a second highest risk of colorectal cancer, with a 66.7% patient rate. In never smokers carrying ADIPOQ rs1063538 CC genotype, BMI was the strongest effect associated factor, and the combination of never smoking, rs1063538 CC genotype and non-overweight presented a 52.4% patient rate (Figure 1). (Receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve in a 10-fold cross-validation for the CART analysis is provided as Figure S1. Area under the curve was 0.62, its 95% CI: 0.59–0.66, P<0.001).

Combined effect of risk factors

To enhance the statistical power, data from combined analysis were used to detect the combined effect of risk factors identified by CART. Since ADIPOR1 rs1539355 presented interactions with other factors, although the main effect of this polymorphism was not detected in the first stage, we still conducted genotyping for this SNP in Stage 2 (Table S2), which would help to provide data for factor-dosage effect analysis in combined population. To evaluate the combined effect of multifactor associated with colorectal cancer risk, we summed the number of risk factors of smoking status, ADIPOQ rs1063538, BMI and ADIPOR1 rs1539355 in each individual and analyzed the resulting colorectal cancer risk. For environmental factors, smoking and BMI≥25 kg/m2 were chosen as risk factors. The genotypes of ADIPOQ rs1063538 and ADIPOR1 rs1539355 were categorized as binary variables according to the split results of CART, namely rs1063538 CC, and rs1539355 AG or GG genotype were viewed as risk factors. We divided the combined population into four subgroups based on the number of risk factors. We found a significant dosage effect association for increased colorectal cancer risk, with an increasing number of risk factors (P for trend <0.0001). Compared with individuals without risk factor, individuals carrying 1, 2 and at least 3 risk factors exhibited a gradient of increased colorectal cancer risk with ORs of 1.18 (95%CI: 0.89–1.58), 1.87 (95%CI: 1.38–2.54) and 4.39 (95%CI: 2.75–7.01), respectively (Table 5).


Discussion

This study systematically evaluated the association between a set of polymorphisms in the ADIPOQ and its receptor genes and colorectal cancer. The major finding was the significant association of a polymorphism in ADIPOQ (rs1063538) with increased colorectal cancer risk. Moreover, the colorectal carcinogenesis role of ADIPOQ rs1063538 was modified by environmental factors such as smoking status, family history of cancer, alcohol use and BMI, and the combined effect of multiple potential factors, including smoking, ADIPOQ rs1063538, BMI and ADIPOR1 rs1539355, showed a significant dosage effect in a gene-environment interaction approach.

In our main effect analysis, the ADIPOQ rs1063538 was the only SNP exhibited a statistically significant association with increased colorectal cancer risk. This association is biologically plausible. First, the ADIPOQ and its receptor genes were newly found to play a role in carcinogenesis especially in obesity-associated malignancies. It has been shown that ADIPOQ could suppress the growth of some malignant cells by regulating AMPK or β-catenin-Wnt pathway, both of which exerted effect in carcinogenesis [29]. ADIPOQ may also contribute to anticancer by promoting apoptosis. ADIPOQ levels have been associated with the activation of apoptotic enzymes in the caspase cascade, which led to cell death, modulation of the expression of several apoptosis-related genes in myelomonocytic cells, and reduction of tumor neovascularization [30]. High level ADIPOQ exposure has been proven to inhibit the proliferation of colorectal cancer cell lines [13], whereas, knockout of ADIPOQ could promote tumor growth in mice by reducing macrophage infiltration [31]. Moreover, epidemiological studies have found underexpression of ADIPOQ existing in a wide variety of human cancers, which strongly supported the importance of ADIPOQ in suppression of cancer initiation and development [32]. Second, the SNP rs1063538 is located within the 3'UTR region of ADIPOQ and previous studies have demonstrated that polymorphisms in 3'UTR presented significant impact on ADIPOQ level. For example, rs6773957 and rs3774261 were found to be the most strongly associated SNPs in American in a genome-wide linkage and association scans of ADIPOQ level, and both of which are located in the 3'UTR of this gene and captured by rs1063538 [33]. Given the important role of ADIPOQ in regulation of cell proliferation and apoptosis [34], [35], and the role of 3'UTR in regulation of gene expression, it was inferred that polymorphisms in 3'UTR of ADIPOQ might play a role in colorectal carcinogenesis, which was documented by Kaklamani et al. [26]. Subsequently, we may infer that rs1063538 could influence colorectal cancer risk by its linkage disequilibrium with other SNPs in the 3'UTR to regulate the expression of ADIPOQ, however, it remained to be confirmed. In addition, it is also probable that this SNP is merely a tag SNP which is in linkage disequilibrium with the real causal SNP. The real causal SNP may be located in the coding region and affect the protein function at the posttranslational level [36].

Besides the modest main effect of ADIPOQ rs1063538, we also observed significant effect of gene-environment interactions, which were able to amplify the modest effect of the single genetic variant, and enhance the predictive power. In two-factor gene-environment interaction analyses and stratified analyses, we found that individuals carrying ADIPOQ rs1063538 CC genotype presented different colorectal cancer risk in different smoking status, family history of cancer categories, alcohol use and BMI. Consistently, a significant interaction was also detected among ADIPOQ rs1063538, ADIPOR1 rs1539355, smoking status and BMI in CART analysis. Although statistical interactions do not necessarily imply biologic interactions, several lines of evidence suggest that our findings may be biologically plausible. As one of the main adipokines, ADIPOQ acts by crosslinking with its receptors, ADIPOR1 and ADIPOR2 [32]. Previously studies have documented that ADIPOQ repressed colon cancer cell lines (including HCT116, HT29 and LoVo) proliferation via ADIPOR1- and -R2-mediated AMPK, whereas, knockdown of ADIPORs such as ADIPOR1 relieved the suppressive effect of ADIPOQ on the growth of cancer cells [19]. Although the ADIPOR1 rs1539355 was not identified functional SNP, this polymorphism was also found to be associated with reduced insulin resistance, suggesting there might be some linkage between this polymorphism and gene expression or function [37]. Besides, the ADIPOR1 rs1539355 could highlight the role of ADIPOQ SNPs in obesity genotype [38]. Since both insulin resistance and obesity genotypes were demonstrated associated with colorectal cancer risk, it was reasonable to believe the interactions between variants of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes played a role in carcinogenesis of colorectal cancer [39]. In addition to the interactions inside ADIPOQ signal pathway, the function of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes was also modified by some colorectal cancer risk associated environmental factors, such as smoking status and BMI. Previous studies have shown that obesity could potentially influence the activation of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes and subsequent cancer risk [40], [41]. For example, Tang et al. indicated that a positive association of genetic variants of ADIPOQ with prostate cancer was limited to persons who were overweight [42] and Petridou et al. showed that women with high BMI and low plasma ADIPOQ had 6.5–fold increased risk of endometrial cancer compared with women with normal BMI and higher ADIPOQ concentrations [43]. Smoke exposure was also demonstrated to inhibit the mRNA expression of ADIPOQ in adipocytes. When compared with none, environmental tobacco smoke exposure of more than 10 cigarettes per day was associated with low ADIPOQ level [44]. Conversely, smoking cessation was found to be associated with increased plasma ADIPOQ level [45], [46]. Family history of cancer and alcohol use were also established risk factors for colorectal cancer, however, studies for the influence of these two factors in the expression of ADIPOQ and its receptors genes were limited. Although there was still some mechanism should be addressed, the interactions might reveal a biological promotion of these factors.

There are some limitations in our study. First, this two-stage case-control study is hospital-based and selection bias may exist, since the controls were from a health examination population which may not be ideal representatives of geographically matched population in similar environmental exposure. However, the controls came from the same region with cases and were randomly sampled, which may reduce the effect of selection bias. Second, the information of patients' BMI is obtained at the first diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Since carcinogenesis is a complex and chronic consumptions, the recent BMI may bring some bias to the association of obesity and colorectal cancer risk. However, a recent large case-control study published in Journal of the National Cancer Institute indicated that BMI based on recent self-reported measures reported similar result with BMI from prospective studies in colorectal cancer risk [47], [48], [49]. Therefore, we think recent BMI in our study will not bring substantial bias to the results of our study. Third, there are some missing data in environmental exposure in both case-control studies, such as family history of cancer, since the participants could not give exact information on related items during interviewing. Therefore, we completed gene-environment interaction analyses in combined population, which may bring more statistical power to the results and reduce bias caused by missing data. Fourth, the sample size is not big enough for some statistical analysis, especially for some subgroup analyses, which may bring some impact to the stability and reliability of the results. So further studies with more sample size, more SNPs and functional explore are warranted to identified the role of ADIPOQ gene family and gene-environment interactions in colorectal carcinogenesis.

In summary, this is the first study to systematically assess the impact of germ line genetic variants in ADIPOQ and its receptor genes and gene-environment interactions on colorectal cancer risk in Chinese. We found one SNP in ADIPOQ (rs1063538) was associated with increased colorectal cancer risk and the potential gene-environment interactions might play more important role in regulating colorectal cancer risk. The identification of novel genetic susceptibility markers of colorectal cancer etiology will not only help us understand the biology of colorectal carcinogenesis but may also be integrated with known clinical, epidemiological and genetic knowledge to help us improve risk prediction of colorectal cancer.


Materials and Methods
Ethics statement

The study was informed consent obtained from all final participants and approved by the review board of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology.

Study participants

A two-stage case-control study design was utilized in this investigation. The first case-control study was used to evaluate the ADIPOQ and its receptor genes polymorphisms in relation to colorectal cancer risk, and then to validate promising associations in the second independent population. In the first stage, cases were newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer between January 1, 2007 and November 31, 2009 in the Eighth Hospital in Wuhan, without a previous cancer diagnosis, and alive at the time of interview. Recruitment for Stage 2 occurred between January 1, 2009 and August 31, 2010 in Taihe Hospital in Shiyan, and the including criteria were same with cases recruited in Stage 1. Controls were selected from the health examination population in the same hospital during the same period and frequently matched with cases by age (±5 years) and sex in each stage. None of the controls had any personal history of cancer, digestive diseases, hypertension or diabetes at the time of blood donation, which was ascertained with a questionnaire completed by each healthy control. Blood sample and personal information regarding sex, birth year, smoking status, alcohol use, recent weight, height and family history of cancer were collected from each participant, and additional information on age at colorectal cancer diagnosis and clinical characteristics was recorded from cases. Of eligible participants, 470 cases (94.0%) and 458 controls (91.6%), and 314 cases (87.22%) and 355 controls (98.61%) completed in-person interviews and donated blood samples in first and second stage, respectively.

SNP selection

A total of 100 SNP markers with a minor allele frequency (MAF) ≥0.1 of ADIPOQ and its receptor genes were download from HapMap (http://www.hapmap.org/) using phase 1 and phase 2 Data Release 24 (Build 36.3) for the Chinese population (Chinese Han from Beijing–CHB). Tag SNPs were chosen for each gene by using Tagger in Haploview (http://www.broadinstitute.org/haploview/haploview). We used the pair-wise mode and selected a minimal set of markers, such that all alleles to be captured would be correlated at an r2≥0.8 with a marker in that set. The ADIPOQ, ADIPOR1 and ADIPOR2 yielded 10, 9 and 8 tag SNPs, respectively. (Detailed information is displayed in Table S1).

Polymorphism analysis

Genomic DNA from peripheral blood samples was isolated using Blood Genomic DNA Purification kit (Tiangen Biotech, Beijing, China) following the manufacturer's protocol. Genotyping was carried out in two phases.

In the first stage, the Sequenom MassARRAY platform (Sequenom San diego, CA, USA) was used for high throughput genotyping and assay design [50]. Genotyping was carried out by using iPLEX chemistry on a matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometer. Multiplex SNP assays were designed by using SPECTRODESIGNER software. PCR reactions, cycling conditions and post-PCR extension reactions were performed as manufacturer's protocol. The iPLEX reaction products were treated with the SpectroCLEAN (Sequenom) resin to remove salts and spotted on a 384 SpectroChip, and then processed and analyzed by the MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer. Genotypes were called using MassARRAY Typer 4.0 software [51]. For each 384-well plate, 20 samples were duplicated and 4 wells were filed with H2O (blank) to cross-check contamination and reliability of the system. A whole plate was considered to have failed if: (i) no SNPs had passed call rate of 80%; and/or (ii) if the success rate of duplicate checks was <99.5% and that of the blank <90%; and/or (iii) the success rate of blank check alone had been <75%. SNPs were removed from the analysis when: (i) they were not call in at least 80% of patients and controls; and/or (ii) they were monomorphic, as these are uninformative; and/or (iii) their genotype frequencies deviated from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) expectation, likely due to genotyping errors [52].

In the second stage, polymorphisms were assessed using the 5′-nuclease (Taqman) assay (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). Primers and probes were designed by Primer Express 3.0 (Applied Biosystems). Reactions were completed and read in a 7900 HT TaqMan sequence detector system (Applied Biosystems). Amplification mixture (12.5 µl) of polymerase chain reaction contained 50 ng of DNA, 900 nM of each forward and reverse primer, 300 nM of each specific probe, and 6.25 µl of Taqman Universal PCR Master Mix (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Amplification was done under the following conditions: 95°C for 10 min followed by 45 cycle of 94°C for 30 s and 62°C for 1 min. Data were analyzed using Allelic Discrimination Program (Applied Biosystems). The call rate was 99.2%. A total of 10% samples were genotyped in duplicate and showed 100% concordance.

Statistical analysis

Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the differences in distribution of categorical variables (sex, smoking status, alcohol use and family history of cancer) and either Wilcoxon rank-sum test or Student's t-test was used for continue variables (age, body weight index [BMI]), where appropriate. In this study, BMI was categorized as overweight (BMI≥25 kg/m2) and non-overweight (BMI<25 kg/m2)[53]. Individuals who had smoked at less 100 cigarettes in their lifetimes were defined as smokers, and the rest were called non-smokers [54]. Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium was tested by a goodness-of-fit χ2 test to compare the observed genotype frequencies to the expected genotype frequencies in controls.

For the main effect of SNPs, unconditional Logistical Regression was conducted to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for potential confounders (age, sex, smoking status and alcohol use). Two-factor gene-environment interaction analyses were also carried out by unconditional Logistical Regression to assess the interactions between polymorphisms and environmental factors, such as BMI, smoking status, alcohol use and family history of cancer. Further stratified analyses were used to explore the role of the associated polymorphisms in different subgroup population. All statistical analyses were two sided. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software 12.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, III).

Classification and Regression Trees (CART) analysis was performed by SPSS software to build a decision tree via recursive partitioning in the splitting criteria of Gini index, which depicts how well each genotype or environmental factor variable predicts class. A CART tree is constructed by splitting a node into two child nodes repeatedly, beginning with the root node that contains the whole learning sample. This process continues until the classification reaches the lowest cross-validation error in the terminal node. Subgroups of individuals with differential result of case-control status are identified in the different terminal nodes of the tree, indicating potential presence of interactions [55]. To quantify the cumulative effect of gene-environment interactions, we tailed the total number of risk factors for each individual and set subject without risk factor as the reference group. Colorectal cancer risk for individuals with different number of risk factors was estimated by calculating ORs and 95% CIs using unconditional Logistic Regression after adjustment for age, sex.


Supporting Information Figure S1

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in a 10-fold cross-validation for the CART analysis.

(TIF)


Click here for additional data file (pone.0027301.s001.png)

Table S1

Non-significant SNPs associated with colorectal cancer risk in Stage 1

(DOC)


Click here for additional data file (pone.0027301.s002.doc)

Table S2

The association between ADIPOR1 rs1539355 and colorectal cancer risk in Stage 2

(DOC)


Click here for additional data file (pone.0027301.s003.doc)


Notes

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC-30972534 to N. S., NSFC-81001275 and 81171878 to M. X. http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/Portal0/default124.htm] and Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-10-0388 to M. X. http://www.edu.cn/]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References
1. Ferlay J,Shin HR,Bray F,Forman D,Mathers C,et al. Year: 2010Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008.Int J Cancer1272893291721351269
2. Jemal A,Siegel R,Xu J,Ward E. Year: 2010Cancer statistics, 2010.CA Cancer J Clin6027730020610543
3. Wan DS. Year: 2009[Epidemiologic trend of and strategies for colorectal cancer].Ai Zheng2889790219728903
4. Calle EE,Rodriguez C,Walker-Thurmond K,Thun MJ. Year: 2003Overweight, obesity, and mortality from cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults.N Engl J Med3481625163812711737
5. MacInnis RJ,English DR,Hopper JL,Haydon AM,Gertig DM,et al. Year: 2004Body size and composition and colon cancer risk in men.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1355355915066919
6. Lin J,Zhang SM,Cook NR,Rexrode KM,Lee IM,et al. Year: 2004Body mass index and risk of colorectal cancer in women (United States).Cancer Causes Control1558158915280637
7. Le Marchand L,Wilkens LR,Kolonel LN,Hankin JH,Lyu LC. Year: 1997Associations of sedentary lifestyle, obesity, smoking, alcohol use, and diabetes with the risk of colorectal cancer.Cancer Res57478747949354440
8. Russo A,Franceschi S,La Vecchia C,Dal Maso L,Montella M,et al. Year: 1998Body size and colorectal-cancer risk.Int J Cancer781611659754646
9. Sandhu MS,Dunger DB,Giovannucci EL. Year: 2002Insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), IGF binding proteins, their biologic interactions, and colorectal cancer.J Natl Cancer Inst9497298012096082
10. Ma J,Giovannucci E,Pollak M,Leavitt A,Tao Y,et al. Year: 2004A prospective study of plasma C-peptide and colorectal cancer risk in men.J Natl Cancer Inst9654655315069117
11. Meilleur KG,Doumatey A,Huang H,Charles B,Chen G,et al. Year: 2010Circulating adiponectin is associated with obesity and serum lipids in West Africans.J Clin Endocrinol Metab953517352120382687
12. Bluher M,Bullen JW,Lee JH,Kralisch S,Fasshauer M,et al. Year: 2006Circulating adiponectin and expression of adiponectin receptors in human skeletal muscle: associations with metabolic parameters and insulin resistance and regulation by physical training.J Clin Endocrinol Metab912310231616551730
13. Byeon JS,Jeong JY,Kim MJ,Lee SM,Nam WH,et al. Year: 2010Adiponectin and adiponectin receptor in relation to colorectal cancer progression.Int J Cancer1272758276721351255
14. Mutoh M,Teraoka N,Takasu S,Takahashi M,Onuma K,et al. Year: 2011Loss of adiponectin promotes intestinal carcinogenesis in Min and wild-type mice.Gastroenterology14020002008. e221334339
15. Yamaji T,Iwasaki M,Sasazuki S,Tsugane S. Year: 2010Interaction between adiponectin and leptin influences the risk of colorectal adenoma.Cancer Res705430543720516125
16. Gonullu G,Kahraman H,Bedir A,Bektas A,Yucel I. Year: 2010Association between adiponectin, resistin, insulin resistance, and colorectal tumors.Int J Colorectal Dis2520521219888587
17. Otake S,Takeda H,Fujishima S,Fukui T,Orii T,et al. Year: 2010Decreased levels of plasma adiponectin associated with increased risk of colorectal cancer.World J Gastroenterol161252125720222170
18. Wei EK,Giovannucci E,Fuchs CS,Willett WC,Mantzoros CS. Year: 2005Low plasma adiponectin levels and risk of colorectal cancer in men: a prospective study.J Natl Cancer Inst971688169416288122
19. Kim AY,Lee YS,Kim KH,Lee JH,Lee HK,et al. Year: 2010Adiponectin represses colon cancer cell proliferation via AdipoR1- and -R2-mediated AMPK activation.Mol Endocrinol241441145220444885
20. Yamauchi T,Kamon J,Ito Y,Tsuchida A,Yokomizo T,et al. Year: 2003Cloning of adiponectin receptors that mediate antidiabetic metabolic effects.Nature42376276912802337
21. Luo Z,Saha AK,Xiang X,Ruderman NB. Year: 2005AMPK, the metabolic syndrome and cancer.Trends Pharmacol Sci26697615681023
22. Williams CJ,Mitsiades N,Sozopoulos E,Hsi A,Wolk A,et al. Year: 2008Adiponectin receptor expression is elevated in colorectal carcinomas but not in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Endocr Relat Cancer1528929918310295
23. Hara K,Boutin P,Mori Y,Tobe K,Dina C,et al. Year: 2002Genetic variation in the gene encoding adiponectin is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in the Japanese population.Diabetes5153654011812766
24. Ong KL,Li M,Tso AW,Xu A,Cherny SS,et al. Year: 2010Association of genetic variants in the adiponectin gene with adiponectin level and hypertension in Hong Kong Chinese.Eur J Endocrinol16325125720516205
25. Siitonen N,Pulkkinen L,Lindstrom J,Kolehmainen M,Eriksson JG,et al. Year: 2011Association of ADIPOQ gene variants with body weight, type 2 diabetes and serum adiponectin concentrations: the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study.BMC Med Genet12521219602
26. Kaklamani VG,Sadim M,Hsi A,Offit K,Oddoux C,et al. Year: 2008Variants of the adiponectin and adiponectin receptor 1 genes and breast cancer risk.Cancer Res683178318418451143
27. Kaklamani V,Yi N,Zhang K,Sadim M,Offit K,et al. Year: 2011Polymorphisms of ADIPOQ and ADIPOR1 and prostate cancer risk.Metabolism601234124321397927
28. Kaklamani VG,Wisinski KB,Sadim M,Gulden C,Do A,et al. Year: 2008Variants of the adiponectin (ADIPOQ) and adiponectin receptor 1 (ADIPOR1) genes and colorectal cancer risk.Jama3001523153118827209
29. Dieudonne MN,Bussiere M,Dos Santos E,Leneveu MC,Giudicelli Y,et al. Year: 2006Adiponectin mediates antiproliferative and apoptotic responses in human MCF7 breast cancer cells.Biochem Biophys Res Commun34527127916678125
30. Brakenhielm E. Year: 2004Adiponectin-induced antiangiogenesis and antitumor activity involve caspase-mediated endothelial cell apoptosis.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A1012476248114983034
31. Sun Y,Lodish HF. Year: 2010Adiponectin deficiency promotes tumor growth in mice by reducing macrophage infiltration.PLoS One5e1198720700533
32. Kelesidis I,Kelesidis T,Mantzoros CS. Year: 2006Adiponectin and cancer: a systematic review.Br J Cancer941221122516570048
33. Ling H,Waterworth DM,Stirnadel HA,Pollin TI,Barter PJ,et al. Year: 2009Genome-wide linkage and association analyses to identify genes influencing adiponectin levels: the GEMS Study.Obesity (Silver Spring)1773774419165155
34. Barb D,Williams CJ,Neuwirth AK,Mantzoros CS. Year: 2007Adiponectin in relation to malignancies: a review of existing basic research and clinical evidence.Am J Clin Nutr86s85886618265479
35. Fenton JI,Birmingham JM. Year: 2010Adipokine regulation of colon cancer: adiponectin attenuates interleukin-6-induced colon carcinoma cell proliferation via STAT-3.Mol Carcinog4970070920564347
36. Wang Y,Lam KS,Yau MH,Xu A. Year: 2008Post-translational modifications of adiponectin: mechanisms and functional implications.Biochem J40962363318177270
37. Ruchat SM,Loos RJF,Rankinen T,Vohl MC,Weisnagel SJ,et al. Year: 2008Associations between glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion phenotypes and polymorphisms in adiponectin and adiponectin receptor genes in the Quebec Family Study.Diabetic Medicine2540040618294218
38. Loos RJ,Ruchat S,Rankinen T,Tremblay A,Perusse L,et al. Year: 2007Adiponectin and adiponectin receptor gene variants in relation to resting metabolic rate, respiratory quotient, and adiposity-related phenotypes in the Quebec Family Study.Am J Clin Nutr85263417209173
39. Gunter MJ,Leitzmann MF. Year: 2006Obesity and colorectal cancer: epidemiology, mechanisms and candidate genes.J Nutr Biochem1714515616426829
40. Li H,Stampfer MJ,Mucci L,Rifai N,Qiu W,et al. Year: 2010A 25-year prospective study of plasma adiponectin and leptin concentrations and prostate cancer risk and survival.Clin Chem56344319910504
41. Freedland SJ,Sokoll LJ,Platz EA,Mangold LA,Bruzek DJ,et al. Year: 2005Association between serum adiponectin, and pathological stage and grade in men undergoing radical prostatectomy.J Urol1741266127016145390
42. Tang H,Dong X,Hassan MM,Abbruzzese JL,Li D. Year: 2011Body Mass Index and Obesity- and Diabetes-associated Genes and Risk for Pancreatic Cancer.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev2077979221357378
43. Petridou E,Mantzoros C,Dessypris N,Koukoulomatis P,Addy C,et al. Year: 2003Plasma adiponectin concentrations in relation to endometrial cancer: a case-control study in Greece.J Clin Endocrinol Metab8899399712629074
44. Nagel G,Arnold FJ,Wilhelm M,Link B,Zoellner I,et al. Year: 2009Environmental tobacco smoke and cardiometabolic risk in young children: results from a survey in south-west Germany.Eur Heart J301885189319468010
45. Otsuka F,Kojima S,Maruyoshi H,Matsuzawa Y,Funahashi T,et al. Year: 2009Smoking cessation is associated with increased plasma adiponectin levels in men.J Cardiol5321922519304126
46. Inoue K,Takeshima F,Kadota K,Yoda A,Tatsuta Y,et al. Year: 2011Early effects of smoking cessation and weight gain on plasma adiponectin levels and insulin resistance.Intern Med5070771221467702
47. Lukanova A,Bjor O,Kaaks R,Lenner P,Lindahl B,et al. Year: 2006Body mass index and cancer: results from the Northern Sweden Health and Disease Cohort.Int J Cancer11845846616049963
48. Pischon T,Lahmann PH,Boeing H,Friedenreich C,Norat T,et al. Year: 2006Body size and risk of colon and rectal cancer in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).J Natl Cancer Inst9892093116818856
49. Campbell PT,Jacobs ET,Ulrich CM,Figueiredo JC,Poynter JN,et al. Year: 2010Case-control study of overweight, obesity, and colorectal cancer risk, overall and by tumor microsatellite instability status.J Natl Cancer Inst10239140020208017
50. Jurinke C,van den Boom D,Cantor CR,Koster H. Year: 2001Automated genotyping using the DNA MassArray technology.Methods Mol Biol17010311611357675
51. Bray MS,Boerwinkle E,Doris PA. Year: 2001High-throughput multiplex SNP genotyping with MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry: practice, problems and promise.Hum Mutat1729630411295828
52. Garcia-Barcelo MM,Miao X,Lui VC,So MT,Ngan ES,et al. Year: 2007Correlation between genetic variations in Hox clusters and Hirschsprung's disease.Ann Hum Genet7152653617274802
53. Holmes MD,Liu S,Hankinson SE,Colditz GA,Hunter DJ,et al. Year: 2004Dietary carbohydrates, fiber, and breast cancer risk.Am J Epidemiol15973273915051582
54. Giovino GA. Year: 2002Epidemiology of tobacco use in the United States.Oncogene217326734012379876
55. Cook NR,Zee RY,Ridker PM. Year: 2004Tree and spline based association analysis of gene-gene interaction models for ischemic stroke.Stat Med231439145315116352

Figures

[Figure ID: pone-0027301-g001]
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.g001.
Figure 1  Classification and regression tree analysis of polymorphisms in ADIPOQ signaling pathway and environmental factors.

Terminal nodes show number of participants in Stage 1. Disease status was classified as cases (1) and controls (0).



Tables
[TableWrap ID: pone-0027301-t001] doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.t001.
Table 1  Characteristics of including participants in the two-stage case-control study.
Stage 1 Stage 2 Combined study
Cases (n = 470) Controls (n = 458) OR(95%CI) P Cases (n = 314) Control (n = 355) OR(95%CI) P Cases (n = 784) Controls (n = 813) OR(95%CI) P
Age (median) 58 58 / 0.72 59 56 / 0.06 58 57 / 0.10
Sex
Male 261(55.5%) 258(56.3%) 1.00 187(59.6%) 208(58.6%) 1.00 448(57.1%) 466(57.3%) 1.00
Female 209(44.5%) 200(43.7%) 1.03(0.80–1.34) 0.81 127(40.4%) 147(41.4%) 0.96(0.71–1.31) 0.80 336(42.9%) 347(42.7%) 1.01(0.83–1.23) 0.94
Smoking status
Never 294(62.6%) 348(77.7%) 1.00 223(71.5%) 288(81.1%) 1.00 517(66.1%) 636(79.2%) 1.00
Ever 176(37.4%) 100(22.3%) 2.08(1.56–2.79) 5.86×10-7 89(28.5%) 67(18.9%) 1.72(1.19–2.46) 0.003 265(33.9%) 167(20.8%) 1.95(1.56–2.45) 4.87×10−9
Alcohol use
Never 310(66.0%) 319(71.4%) 1.00 235(75.6%) 287(81.1%) 1.00 545(69.8%) 606(75.7%) 1.00
Ever 160(34.0%) 128(28.6%) 1.29(0.97–1.70) 0.08 76(24.4%) 67(18.9%) 1.39(0.96–2.01) 0.08 236(30.2%) 195(24.3%) 1.25(1.08–1.68) 0.01
BMI (Mean ± SD) 23.2± 3.3 22.7±3.2 / 0.06 22.8± 3.3 22.8± 2.9 / 0.90 23.0 ± 3.4 22.8± 3.3 / 0.15
Family history of cancer
Without 324(77.0%) 371(83.6%) 1.00 266(86.9%) 336(94.6%) 1.00 590(81.2%) 707(88.5%) 1.00
With 97(23.0%) 73(16.4%) 1.52(1.08–2.13) 0.02 40(13.1%) 19(5.4%) 2.66(1.50–4.70) 0.001 137(18.8%) 92(11.5%) 1.78(1.34–2.38) 6.22×10−5

[TableWrap ID: pone-0027301-t002] doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.t002.
Table 2  Significant SNP associated with colorectal cancer risk.
SNP Genotype Stage 1 Stage 2 Combined Study
No. (Cases/Controls) OR(95%CI) a P No. (Cases/Controls) OR(95%CI) a P No. (Cases/Controls) OR(95%CI) a P
ADIPOQ TT 128/145 1.00 68/107 1.00 196/252 1.00
rs1063538 CT 172/200 1.02(0.74–1.41) 0.89 152/171 1.34(0.91–1.96) 0.14 324/371 1.14(0.90–1.46) 0.28
CC 170/104 1.94(1.37–2.74) 1.94×10−4 94/76 1.91(1.23–2.95) 0.004 264/180 1.94(1.48–2.54) 1.49×10−6
CT+TT 300/345 1.00 220/278 1.00 520/623 1.00
CC 170/104 1.91(1.42–2.57) 1.79×10−5 94/76 1.58(1.10–2.25) 0.01 264/180 1.79(1.43–2.25) 4.49×10−7
T allele frequency 0.46/0.55 0.46/0.54 0.46/0.55

aAdjusted by age, sex, smoking status and alcohol use.


[TableWrap ID: pone-0027301-t003] doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.t003.
Table 3  Two-factor gene-environment interaction analyses by Logistic Regression in combined population.
Variables OR(95%CI) a Pb
rs1063538 × Smoking status
TT × Never smoking 1.00
CT × Ever smoking 1.48(1.06–2.05) 0.02
CC × Ever smoking 4.52(2.78–7.34) 1.10×10−9
rs1063538 × Alcohol use
TT × Never drinking 1.00
CT × Ever drinking 0.72(0.52–1.01) 0.06
CC × Ever drinking 1.97(1.27–3.04) 0.002
rs1063538 × Family history of cancer
TT × Without family history of cancer 1.00
CT × With family history of cancer 1.61(1.03–2.53) 0.04
CC × With family history of cancer 3.18(1.73–5.82) 1.85×10−4
rs1063538 × BMI
TT × (BMI<25 kg/m2) 1.00
CT × (BMI≥25 kg/m2) 1.05(0.71–1.54) 0.83
CC × (BMI≥25 kg/m2) 1.80(1.14–2.85) 0.01

aAdjusted by age, sex, smoking status and alcohol use.

bThe cut-off point of P value was set as 0.002 for multi-comparison.


[TableWrap ID: pone-0027301-t004] doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.t004.
Table 4  Stratified analysis of the association between ADIPIQ rs1063538 and colorectal cancer risk in combined population.
Variables ADIPOQ rs1063538
Comparison OR(95%CI) a Pb
Smoking status
Ever CT vs TT 0.98(0.57–1.67) 0.93
CC vs TT 2.81(1.43–5.50) 0.003
Never CT vs TT 1.21(0.90–1.62) 0.21
CC vs TT 1.74(1.26–2.40) 0.001
Alcohol use
Ever CT vs TT 0.90(0.51–1.60) 0.73
CC vs TT 2.13(1.08–4.18) 0.03
Never CT vs TT 1.28(0.96–1.73) 0.10
CC vs TT 1.87(1.35–2.58) 1.48×10−4
Family history of cancer
Yes CT vs TT 1.05(0.56–1.99) 0.88
CC vs TT 2.14(1.01–4.54) 0.05
No CT vs TT 1.20(0.91–1.58) 0.20
CC vs TT 1.95(1.44–2.65) 1.69×10−5
BMI (kg/m2)
<25 CT vs TT 1.37(1.00–1.87) 0.05
CC vs TT 2.05(1.45–2.90) 4.63×10−5
≥25 CT vs TT 1.06(0.60–1.87) 0.84
CC vs TT 1.66(0.90–3.07) 0.11

aAdjusted by age, sex, smoking status and alcohol use.

bThe cut-off point of P value was set as 0.002 for multi-comparison.


[TableWrap ID: pone-0027301-t005] doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027301.t005.
Table 5  Cumulative effect of risk factors of smoking, ADIPOQ rs1063538, BMI and ADIPOR1 rs1539355 in colorectal cancer susceptibility in combined study.
No. of risk factors No. (cases/controls) OR (95%CI)a P P for trend
0 123/197 1.00 <0.0001
1 221/299 1.18(0.89–1.58) 0.25
2 203/175 1.87(1.38–2.54) 5.38×10−5
≥3 86/32 4.39(2.75–7.01) 5.48×10−10

aAdjusted by age, sex.



Article Categories:
  • Research Article
Article Categories:
  • Biology
    • Computational Biology
      • Population Genetics
        • Genetic Polymorphism
    • Evolutionary Biology
      • Population Genetics
        • Genetic Polymorphism
    • Genetics
      • Population Genetics
        • Genetic Polymorphism
      • Cancer Genetics
    • Population Biology
      • Population Genetics
        • Genetic Polymorphism
Article Categories:
  • Medicine
    • Epidemiology
      • Cancer Epidemiology
      • Molecular Epidemiology
    • Gastroenterology and Hepatology
      • Gastrointestinal Cancers
    • Oncology
      • Cancer Risk Factors
        • Genetic Causes of Cancer
      • Cancers and Neoplasms
        • Gastrointestinal Tumors


Previous Document:  The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib enhances ATRA-induced differentiation of neuroblastoma cells via...
Next Document:  Hedgehog signaling antagonist GDC-0449 (Vismodegib) inhibits pancreatic cancer stem cell characteris...