P16 gene silencing along with p53 single-nucleotide polymorphism and risk of esophageal cancer in Northeast India. Issue 5 (April 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Das, Mandakini; Sharma, Santanu Kumar; Sekhon, Gaganpreet Singh; Mahanta, Jagadish; Phukan, Rup Kumar; Jalan, Bimal Kumar
• Is Part Of: Tumor biology. Volume 39:Issue 5(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-04
• Subjects: Esophageal cancer -- Northeast India -- p16 gene -- p53 -- methylation; Cancer -- Periodicals; Oncology -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Periodicals; 616.994
• DOI: 10.1177/1010428317698384
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1010-4283

Abstract

The high incidence of esophageal cancer in Northeast India and the unique ethnic background and dietary habits provide a great opportunity to study the molecular genetics behind esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in this part of the region. We hypothesized that in addition to currently known environmental risk factors for esophageal cancer, genetic and epigenetic factors are also involved in esophageal carcinogenesis in Northeast India. Therefore, in this study, we explored the possible association between the two important G1 cell cycle regulatory genes p16 and p53 and environmental risk factors and risk of esophageal carcinogenesis. A total of 100 newly diagnosed esophageal cancer cases along with equal number of age-, sex-, and ethnicity-matched controls were included in this study. Methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction was used to determine the p16 promoter methylation status. Single-nucleotide polymorphism at codon 72 of p53 gene was assessed by the polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism method. Aberrant methylation of p16 gene was seen in 81% of esophageal cancer cases. Hypermethylation of p16 gene was not found in healthy controls. p53 Pro/Pro genotype was found to be a risk genotype in Northeast India compared with Arg/Pro and Arg/Arg. p53 variant/polymorphism was significantly associated with esophageal cancer risk in the study population under all three genetic models, namely, dominant model (Arg/Pro + Pro/Pro vs Arg/Arg odds ratio = 2.25, confidence interval = 1.19–4.26; p = 0.012), recessive model (Arg/Arg + Arg/Pro vs Pro/Pro odds ratio = 2.35, confidence interval = 1.24–4.44; p = 0.008), and homozygous model (Pro/Pro vs Arg/Arg odds ratio = 3.33, confidence interval = 1.54–7.20; p = 0.002). However, p53 variant/polymorphism was not statistically associated with esophageal cancer risk under the heterozygous model (Pro/Pro vs Arg/Pro). In the case-only analysis based on p16 methylation, the p53 variant/polymorphism (Pro/Pro or Arg/Pro) showed significant association for esophageal cancer risk (odds ratio = 3.33, confidence interval = 1.54–7.20; p = 0.002). Gene–gene and gene–environment interaction using the case-only approach revealed a strong association between p16 methylation, p53 single-nucleotide polymorphism, and environmental factors and esophageal cancer risk. Cases with p16 methylation and p53 variant/polymorphism (Pro/Pro or Arg/Pro) along with both betel quid and tobacco chewing habit (odds ratio = 8.29, confidence interval = 1.14–60.23; p = 0.037) conferred eightfold increased risk toward esophageal cancer development. This study reveals a synergistic interaction between epigenetic, genetic, and environmental factors and risk of esophageal cancer in this high-incidence region of Northeast India. The inactivation of either p16 or p53 in a majority of esophageal cancer cases in this study suggests the possible crosstalk between the important cell cycle genes.