Genetic polymorphisms of CYP24A1 gene and cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis including 40640 subjects

Abstract

BackgroundWhether cytochrome P450 24A1 (CYP24A1) polymorphism is associated with cancer susceptibility, the individual study results are still controversial. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive study to identify the association of CYP24A1 polymorphisms (rs4809960, rs6068816, rs2296241, rs4809957, rs2762939) with cancer susceptibility.MethodsElectronic databases including Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were systematically retrieved for relevant publications. Fixed or random-effect model was selected to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).ResultsEighteen published articles were identified. The results indicated that rs4809960 polymorphism was associated with a decreased cancer risk in Caucasian (TT vs. TC+CC: P=0.035; C vs. T: P=0.016) and Asian population (CC vs. TC+TT: OR P=0.044; TT vs. TC+CC: P=0.021; CC vs. TT: P=0.020; C vs. T: P=0.008) and breast cancer risk (TT vs. TC+CC: P = 0.007; TC vs. TT: P=0.004; C vs. T: P=0.033). A significant association was found between rs2296241 polymorphism and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma risk (AA vs. GG+AG: P = 0.023) and prostate cancer susceptibility (A vs. G: P=0.022). Furthermore, rs4809957 polymorphism was associated with prostate cancer susceptibility in Caucasian (GG vs. GA+AA: P=0.029; GA vs. GG: P=0.022) and breast cancer susceptibility (AA vs. GG+GA: P=0.012; AA vs. GG, P=0.010; A vs. G: P=0.024). Additionally, rs6068816 polymorphism significantly decreased the lung cancer (CC vs. CT+TT: P = 0.016; TT vs. CC: P = 0.044; CT vs. CC: P = 0.036; T vs. C: P = 0.016) and breast cancer risk (TT vs. CC+CT: P = 0.043; TT vs. CC: P = 0.039). No association was found for rs2762939 polymorphism with overall cancer risk. However, for rs2296241, rs4809957, and rs6068816 polymorphisms, there were no significant differences after the Bonferroni correction.ConclusionThe meta-analysis suggested that rs4809960 was associated with cancer risk and might be a genetic marker for predicting cancer risk. More large-scale and large-sample studies are necessary to further confirm these results.