Skip Navigation


Carcinogenesis Advance Access originally published online on June 29, 2005
Carcinogenesis 2006 27(1):103-111; doi:10.1093/carcin/bgi171
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
27/1/103    most recent
bgi171v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, D.
Right arrow Articles by Hassan, M. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, D.
Right arrow Articles by Hassan, M. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Carcinogenesis vol.27 no.1 © Oxford University Press 2005; all rights reserved.

Polymorphisms of cytochrome P4501A2 and N-acetyltransferase genes, smoking, and risk of pancreatic cancer

Donghui Li *, Li Jiao, Yanan Li, Mark A. Doll 3, David W. Hein 3, Melissa L. Bondy 2, Douglas B. Evans 1, Robert A. Wolff, Renato Lenzi, Peter W. Pisters 1, James L. Abbruzzese and Manal M. Hassan

Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, 1 Department of Surgical Oncology and 2 Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 426, Houston, TX 77030, USA and 3 Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology and Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY 40292, USA

* To whom correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed. Tel: +1 713 792 2012; Fax: +1 713 563 1195; Email: dli{at}mdanderson.org


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
To test the hypothesis that genetic variation in the metabolism of tobacco carcinogens, such as aromatic amines (AA) and heterocyclic amines (HCA), contributes to pancreatic cancer, we have examined genetic polymorphisms of three key enzymes, i.e. cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) and N-acetyltransferase 1 and 2 (NAT1 and NAT2), in a hospital-based case–control study of 365 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and 379 frequency-matched healthy controls. Genotypes were determined using PCR–restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and Taqman methods. Smoking information was collected by personal interview. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated by unconditional multivariate logistic regression analysis. We found that the NAT1 ‘rapid’ alleles were associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of pancreatic cancer (95% CI: 1.0–2.1) with adjustment of potential confounders. This effect was more prominent among never smokers (AOR: 2.4, 95% CI: 1.4–4.3) and females (AOR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.0–3.1). Some genotypes were significantly associated with increased risk for pancreatic cancer among smokers, especially heavy smokers (<20 pack years). For example, heavy smokers with the CYP1A2*1D (T-2467delT) delT, CYP1A2*1F(A-163C) C allele, NAT1 ‘rapid’ or NAT2 ‘slow’ alleles had an AOR (95% CI) of 1.4 (0.7–2.3), 1.9 (1.1–3.4), 3.0 (1.6–5.4) and 1.5 (0.8–2.6), respectively, compared with never smokers carrying the non-at-risk alleles. These effects were more prominent in females than in males. The corresponding AOR (95% CI) was 3.1 (1.0–8.0), 3.8 (1.5–10.1), 4.5 (1.6–12.7) and 2.0 (0.8–5.1) for females versus 1.0 (0.4–1.9), 1.1 (0.5–2.4), 2.1 (1.0–4.6) and 1.1 (0.5–2.6) for males. A significant synergistic effect of CYP1A2*1F C allele and NAT1"rapid" alleles on the risk for pancreatic cancer was also detected among never smokers (AOR: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2–6.9) and among females (AOR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.1–5.7). These data suggest that polymorphisms of the CYP1A2 and NAT1 genes modify the risk of pancreatic cancer.

Abbreviations: AA, aromatic amines; AOR, adjusted odds ratio; CYP, cytochrome P450; GST, glutathione S-transferase; HCA, heterocyclic amines; NAT, N-acetyltransferase; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
In the USA, pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in both men and women (1). It is a lethal disease: the mortality rate of which approximately equals its incidence rate. Its etiology is poorly understood, and the most consistent risk factor, as suggested by epidemiologic studies, is cigarette smoking, which is implicated in ~30% of the cases of pancreatic cancer (2).

Cigarette smoke is a major source of carcinogen exposure and individual variation in carcinogen metabolism has been considered as a risk factor for smoking-related cancers. Whereas many molecular epidemiologic studies have explored the genetic determinants involved in tobacco-related human cancers, few studies have been reported on pancreatic cancer. Three early reports, all with limited sample sizes reported no significant association between susceptibility to pancreatic cancer and polymorphisms of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A1, 2D6, 2E1, glutathione S-transferase (GST) M1, GSTT1 and N-acetyltransferase (NAT) genes (3–5). Nevertheless, a recently reported population-based case–control study found that the combination of heavy smoking and the presence of a GSTT1 null genotype was significantly associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer, and the effect was more prominent among women than among men (6). The same study failed to demonstrate any significant main effect of CYP1A1 on risk of pancreatic cancer or interaction with smoking (6).

While the role of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) exposure and metabolism in pancreatic cancer need further investigation, several lines of evidence support a role of aromatic amine (AA) and heterocyclic amine (HCA) carcinogens in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer. First of all, the spectra of p53 and K-ras mutations in pancreatic adenocarcinoma are more similar to that of bladder cancer and colorectal cancer than that of lung, head and neck, and esophageal cancers (7,8). The predominant G to A transition observed in the former resembles that seen in animals exposed to AA or nitrosamines, whereas the G to T transversion implicates exposure to PAHs. Second, AA-DNA adducts have been identified in human pancreatic tissues (9). Third, the pancreas is highly susceptible to HCA-induced DNA damage (10–13). Fourth, epidemiological studies have found that high consumption of cooked meat and fish increases the risk for pancreatic cancer (14,15).

The carcinogenic action of AA and HCA requires metabolic activation resulting in electrophiles that bind to DNA. CYP1A2 is the major enzyme involved in the N-hydroxylation activation of these compounds (16). The expression of CYP1A2 is controlled by two mechanisms, i.e. constitutive expression and inducibility regulation. Although expressed mainly in the liver, expression of the CYP1A2 enzyme in human pancreas has been detected (17,18). Large individual variations exist in the enzyme activities of CYP1A2, but the phenotype and genotype correlation is not well understood (19). The CYP1A2 gene consists of 7 exons and is located at chromosome 15q22-qter. More than 40 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the CYP1A2 gene have been discovered (available at www.imm.ki.se/CYPalleles/cyp1a2.htm). The initial report from Japan (20) reported four SNPs of this gene, resulting in four alleles: CYP1A2 A (G-3860A), B (T-2467delT), C (T-739G) and D (A-163C). The Human Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Allele Nomenclature Committee subsequently named the A, B, C and D alleles as CYP1A2*1B, 1D, 1E and 1F, respectively (available at www.imm.ki.se/CYPalleles/cyp1a2.htm). A later study of 13 CYP1A2 SNPs suggested that only the CYP1A2*1D and CYP1A2*1F need to be analyzed in the routine assessment of CYP1A2 genotype (21). CYP1A2*1F possesses an intron 1 A-163C (aka A-164C and A-154C) polymorphism that appears to affect the inducibility of the enzyme (22,23). Whether CYP1A2 polymorphisms modify susceptibility to human cancers is unknown.

Two other important enzymes involved in the metabolism of AA and HCA carcinogens are N-acetyltransferase 1 (NAT1) and N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2). The N-hydroxylation of AA or HCA catalyzed by CYP1A2 may compete with N-acetylation catalyzed by NAT while the N-hydroxylation intermediates of AA or HCA may be further activated by O-acetylation to more DNA reactive species (24). NAT1 and NAT2 catalyze both N-acetylation and O-acetylation (25). NAT1 and NAT2 genes are located on chromosome 8p 23.1–p21.3 and 8p22, respectively, and both are encoded by single open reading frames of 870 bp that exhibit genetic polymorphism in human populations (26). Molecular epidemiological studies demonstrated that individuals with NAT1 rapid acetylator genotypes or NAT2 slow acetylator genotypes in the presence of known carcinogen exposures, such as cigarette smoking, dietary exposure to HCA or occupational exposure to AA, were at increased risk for various types of human cancers (27,28). The human pancreas predominantly expresses NAT1 (29) whereas NAT2 is predominantly expressed in the liver. We hypothesize that NAT2 slow acetylator genotype may lead to a deficient hepatic detoxification of carcinogens while the higher local NAT1 activity contributes to the formation of highly reactive DNA damaging species in the pancreas; hence, the slow NAT2 and rapid NAT1 genotypes could increase an individual's risk for pancreatic cancer.

To our knowledge, no study has ever been conducted to investigate the role of CYP1A2 gene in pancreatic cancer and the NAT genes have only been examined in a small study of 81 pancreatic cancer cases and 78 controls (4). Thus, we examined the frequencies of the CYP1A2*1D and *1F alleles and NAT1 and NAT2 genotypes, and the effect of these polymorphisms on risk for pancreatic cancer in a hospital-based case–control study.


   Materials and methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Study population
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (M.D. Anderson). Cases were patients with pathologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas who had been seen at M.D. Anderson from the year 2000 to 2004. There was no restriction in the recruitment of cases with respect to age, race and sex. All study participants were residents of the USA and were able to communicate in English. The response rate of case recruitment was 78%. The common reasons for refusal to participate included the patients being too sick or too upset to participate and time constraints. There were no significant demographic differences between individuals who agreed or refused to participate in the study. Controls were recruited from spouses, friends and non-blood relatives of patients with various types of cancers other than pancreatic cancer. The eligible controls were identified by a 5-min self-administered questionnaire acquiring demographic information and cancer history. Cases and controls were frequency-matched by age (±5 years), sex and race. The response rate of control recruitment was 77%. There were no significant differences between individuals who agreed or refused to participate in terms of age, sex, race and state of residence.

Data collection
A questionnaire was administered to study participants by personal interview to collect information on tobacco use, cigarette smoking, alcohol use, occupational history, medical history and family history of cancer. Both cases and controls were interviewed by the same study personnel. No proxy interviews were conducted. Those who smoked <100 cigarettes in their lifetime were defined as ever smokers. Smokers who have quit smoking for <1 year before recruitment were defined as former smokers. Those who consumed four alcoholic drinks per month for at least 6 months in their lifetime were defined as ever drinkers. A common portion size of each alcoholic beverage type (beer, wine and liquor) was specified. Daily ethanol intake was calculated based on the type of drink, the frequency of use and the amount consumed. The ethanol content of each type of drink was calculated assuming 13.2 g of ethanol for 12 oz of beer, 10.8 g for 4 oz of wine and 15.1 g for 1.5 oz of liquor, according to the standards of the US Department of Agriculture. The 75th percentile value of weekly alcohol intake (gram) of controls among alcohol drinkers was used as the criterion to define heavy versus light drinkers.

A blood sample was obtained from each participant along with consent for genotyping. The exclusion criteria for the final data analysis included (i) failure to donate a blood sample, (ii) failure to complete the risk questionnaire, (iii) having a prior history of cancer (except for non-melanoma skin cancer) and (iv) being misdiagnosed as pancreatic adenocarcinoma (case only).

Detection of CYP1A2*1D and CYP1A2*1F polymorphisms
DNA was extracted from peripheral blood lymphocytes using a Flexigene DNA kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The CYP1A2 polymorphisms were detected by PCR–RFLP (20). The case–control status of the samples was blinded to the laboratory personnel. More than 10% of samples were analyzed in duplicate and were 100% concordant.

Detection of NAT1 and NAT2 polymorphisms
Eight SNPs of the NAT1 gene (A-40T, C-344T, G445A, G459A, G560A, T640G, T1088A and C1095A) and six SNPs of the NAT2 gene (C282T, T341C, C481T, G590A, A803G and G857A) were determined using the MassCode method by Qiagen (Valencia, CA) in the first batch of 300 samples with equal number of cases and controls. The second batch of 400 samples was genotyped for NAT1 (30) and NAT2 (31) using Taqman-based methods at the University of Louisville. The SNPs included NAT1 C97T, C190T, G445A, C559T, G560A, A752T, T1088A and C1095T, and NAT2 G191A, C282T, T341C, C481T, G590A, A803G and G857A. The underlined SNPs are those that were overlapped in both batches of DNA samples. About 10% of the samples were also analyzed using a PCR–RFLP method (32,33).

Statistical analysis
{chi}2-tests were used to compare the distribution of categorical variables and genotype frequencies between cases and controls. Tests for Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium were conducted using a {chi}2-test with 1 degree of freedom. Risk assessment was restricted to non-Hispanic whites because of the known ethnic variations in genotype distribution and pancreatic cancer risk as well as the small sample size of the minority groups. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was used to calculate ORs and 95% CIs. Any variables that showed a significant risk modifying effect in univariate analyses were included in the multivariate analyses. The minor CYP1A2*1D delT allele and the CYP1A2*1F C allele was considered as the at-risk allele. Individuals homozygous or heterozygous for NAT1*10 or NAT1*11 alleles were considered ‘rapid’ acetylator genotypes. Individuals homozygous for NAT1*3 or NAT1*4 were considered the reference genotype. The low frequency NAT1*14 allele (slow acetylator allele) was not included in the risk assessment. NAT2*4, *12A, *B, *C and *13 are rapid acetylator NAT2 alleles and all others are slow acetylator NAT2 alleles (25,28). Individuals homozygous for slow NAT2 alleles are slow acetylator genotype. The NAT1 rapid and NAT2 slow acetylator genotypes were considered as ‘at-risk’. For detection of possible interactions between genotypes and smoking, never smokers with the non-at-risk genotype was used as the reference group and AORs for never smokers with the at-risk genotype (OR10), smokers with non-at-risk genotype (OR01), and smokers with the at-risk genotype (OR11) were estimated using unconditional logistic regression. The magnitude of an interaction effect was assessed by evaluating departure from additive effects using the synergism index (S index) (34,35). A synergistic effect was suggested when OR11 was greater than the sum of OR10 and OR01. The S index and 95% CI was calculated as OR11 – 1/OR01 + OR10 – 2. All statistical analyses were performed using STATA and SPSS software. P-values > 0.05 were indicative of statistical significance.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
The study involved 365 cases of pathologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma and 379 healthy controls. The distributions of sex and race between the two groups were approximately equal: 58.1% of cases versus 54.4% of controls were men and 41.9% of the cases versus 45.6% of the controls were women (P = 0.31); and 87.4% of the cases and 88.4% of the controls were non-Hispanic whites (P = 0.91). Hispanics and African Americans were 6 and 5% of the study population, respectively. Because of the small number of minorities enrolled in this study and the known racial differences in pancreatic cancer risk and genotypes, all risk estimates were restricted only to non-Hispanic whites (319 cases and 335 controls). The mean ± SD age of cases and controls was 62.3 ± 10.4 and 60.4 ± 11.1 years, respectively (P = 0.01). As shown in Table I, controls were overrepresented with individuals younger than 52 years of age. A total of 52% of the cases and 58% of the controls were from Texas, and the remaining were from 39 other USA states. Family history of cancer (in the first degree relatives) was not associated with the risk for pancreatic cancer (data not shown), whereas family history of pancreatic cancer was non-significantly associated with an increased risk for pancreatic cancer. Because diabetes and pancreatitis can be a manifestation of pancreatic cancer, risk estimation was performed separately in individuals with a history of these diseases, subdivided by the length of time these conditions diagnosed relative to the time of their cancer diagnosis or recruitment into this study (<3 versus ≥3 years). In both subgroups, diabetes was associated with a significantly increased risk of pancreatic cancer. It is also notable that 90% of the self-reported pancreatitis cases occurred within 3 years of the cancer diagnosis (Table I). Smoking and alcohol consumption was not associated with the history of pancreatitis. Although all four controls with pancreatitis were ever smokers, the frequency of pancreatitis was 8.6% in never smokers and 11.1% in ever smokers among cases (P = 0.46). The frequency of pancreatitis among cases was 9.5, 3.7 and 12.5% among never drinkers, light drinkers and heavy drinkers, respectively. Alcohol use, in general, did not appear to affect the risk for pancreatic cancer. Cases tended to have consumed a larger volume of alcohol than controls; the median weekly alcohol consumption was 168 versus 86 g in cases and controls, respectively (P = 0.002, Mann–Whitney's test). However, heavy alcohol consumption (>263 g/week) did not translate into increased risk of pancreatic cancer, and light drinking (≤263 g/week) actually showed a protective effect in this study population.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table I. Risk factors for pancreatic cancer

 
The association between cigarette smoking and risk for pancreatic cancer in the study population is summarized in Table II. Ever smokers comprised 61.9% of the cases and 53.2% of the controls. If individuals who consumed pipe, cigar, snuff and/or chewing tobacco for more than a year are included as smokers, 66.0% of the cases and 57.3% of the controls would be classified as ever smokers. Males had a higher smoking prevalence (63% of controls and 65% of cases) than females (40% of controls and 58% of cases), but female smokers had a greater risk of developing pancreatic cancer (AOR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.2–3.5) than male smokers (AOR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.6–1.5). Overall, ever smokers had a 30% increased risk for pancreatic cancer (95% CI: 0.9–1.9). Former smokers had a 2.2-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer among females, but not among males. A dose–response relationship was observed between the intensity (cigarettes smoked per day) and duration (years smoked) of smoking, as well as the product of intensity and duration (pack years) of smoking and the risk of pancreatic cancer among women. The median and 75th percentile of pack years smoked was 20 and 40 among controls compared with 25 and 48 among cases, respectively.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table II. Cigarette smoking and risk of pancreatic cancera

 
The genotype frequencies in non-Hispanic whites are presented in Table III. The distribution of CYP1A2*1D and CYP1A2*1F genotypes was in agreement with the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Among the 19 NAT gene SNPs tested, all but two, i.e. NAT1 G560A and NAT2 G857A, were in agreement with the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. The genotype–allele frequencies of CYP1A2 were quite comparable between cases and controls (all P-values > 0.05) and no significant main effect on the risk for pancreatic cancer was observed. Hispanic controls (n = 22) had a higher frequency of the CYP1A2*1D delT allele (0.62), CYP1A2*1F C allele (0.35) and NAT1 rapid genotype (54%), but a lower frequency of NAT2 slow genotype (45%) than non-Hispanic whites. African American controls (n = 18) showed the same trend as Hispanics, with the corresponding allele/genotype frequencies of 0.42, 0.50, 56 and 22%, respectively. Because of the limited sample size, no risk estimate was made in these minority groups.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table III. Distribution of CYP1A2, NAT1 and NAT2 genotypesa

 
The frequencies of major NAT1 genotypes among non-Hispanic white controls was *4/*4: 0.60, *4/*10: 0.27, *10/*10: 0.03, *4/*3: 0.03 and *4*11: 0.02. NAT1 alleles were further classified into rapid (*10 and *11) and reference (*3 and *4) alleles and the frequencies of the rapid versus reference genotypes stratified by racial groups are presented in Table III. A borderline significant difference in the distribution of NAT1 rapid alleles between cases and controls was observed among non-Hispanic whites (P = 0.06). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the NAT1 rapid alleles were associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of pancreatic cancer (95% CI: 1.0–2.1) after adjusting for age, diabetes and pancreatitis. This association was more prominent in never smokers (AOR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.4–4.3) and females (AOR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.0–3.1) than in smokers (AOR: 1.1, 95% CI: 0.7–1.8) and males (AOR: 1.3, 95% CI: 0.8–2.2).

The NAT2 allele frequencies detected in the non-Hispanic white control subjects of the current study are comparable with those reported in a large pool of Caucasian controls (36). The observed (versus previously reported) frequencies of the most common NAT2 genotypes were *5/*6: 0.23 (0.26), *5/*5: 0.22 (0.22), *4/*5: 0.17 (0.21), *4/*6: 0.11 (0.13), *4/*4: 0.05 (0.07) and *6/*6: 0.08 (0.07). The distribution of the rapid, intermediate and slow acetylator NAT2 genotypes in cases and controls are shown in Table III. There was no significant difference in the distribution of NAT2 genotypes between cases and controls within the non-Hispanic white group. The distribution of the NAT1 rapid genotype was higher among individuals with the NAT2 rapid than those with the NAT2 slow genotypes. The frequency of NAT1 rapid was 41.5% in NAT2 rapid and 25.3% in NAT2 slow controls, 51.8% in NAT2 rapid and 32.5% in NAT2 slow cases.

Next, we examined the association between these genotypes and the risk for pancreatic cancer in relation to cigarette smoking. Ever smokers carrying the CYP1A2*1F C allele or NAT1 rapid genotype, both reported to confer a higher inducibility or enzyme activity, showed a 1.6- to 1.9-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer compared with never smokers with the low inducibility/activity alleles (Table IV). The magnitude of this effect was greater in women than in men. Women with the at-risk genotypes and were ever smokers had a 3-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer compared with women carrying the non-at-risk genotypes and who never smoked. There was a significant additive interaction between the presence of CYP1A2*1F allele and smoking on the risk of pancreatic cancer among women (S index = 4.0, 95% CI: 1.5–6.5). For the same comparison, men with the at-risk genotypes and were ever smokers had an AOR of 0.9 and 1.2 only. On the other hand, using never smokers with the non-at-risk genotypes as the reference group, CYP1A2*1D allele (AOR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.8–2.0) or NAT2 slow genotype (AOR: 1.3, 95% CI: 0.8–2.2) were not statistically associated with risk for pancreatic cancer among smokers.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table IV. Interaction of genotypes with cigarette smoking

 
The genotype effect on the risk for pancreatic cancer was more prominent among heavy smokers and among females. Using the median of the control values (20 pack years) as the criterion, heavy smokers (>20 pack years) with the at-risk genotypes of CYP1A2*1D, CYP1A2*1F, NAT1 or NAT2 had an AOR (95% CI) of 1.4 (0.7–2.3), 1.9 (1.1–3.4), 3.0 (1.6–5.4) and 1.5 (0.8–2.6), respectively, compared with never smokers carrying the non-at-risk genotypes (Table V). When we evaluated the association between these genotypes and smoking by sex, we found that women had a higher AOR than men for all four genotypes. Compared with women who never smoked and carrying the non-at-risk genotypes, women who smoked >20 pack years and carrying the CYP1A2*1D delT allele, CYP1A2*1F C allele, NAT1 rapid or NAT2 slow genotypes had an AOR (95% CI) of 3.1 (1.0–8.0), 3.8 (1.5–10.1), 4.5 (1.6–12.7) and 2.0 (0.8–5.1), respectively. The corresponding AOR (95% CI) was 1.0 (0.4–1.9), 1.1 (0.5–2.4), 2.1 (1.0–4.6) and 1.1 (0.5–2.6) among men. A weak interaction on an additive scale was observed between heavy smoking and the CYP1A2*1D and CYP1A2*1F alleles among females, the estimated S index (95% CI) was 5.6 (0.3–10.9) and 2.8 (0.8–4.7), respectively.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table V. Interaction between genotype and smoking by gender

 
Finally, we attempted to examine the joint effect of different genotypes. We observed a significant joint effect of the CYP1A2*1F C allele and NAT1 rapid genotype on risk for pancreatic cancer among never smokers and females (Table VI). The overall AOR (95% CI) was 1.8 (1.1–3.1) for individuals carrying the NAT1 rapid and CYP1A2*1F C alleles compared with individuals carrying the NAT1 reference and CYP1A2*1F AA/AC genotypes. This effect was more prominent in never smokers (AOR: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2–6.9) versus smokers (AOR: 1.5, 95% CI: 0.8–2.8) and in females (AOR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.1–5.7) versus males (AOR: 1.5, 95% CI: 0.8–2.9). Individuals having either of these two at-risk alleles alone did not show a significantly higher risk of pancreatic cancer. The S index (95% CI) for interaction in females was 2.3 (0.12–4.43). No significant joint effect of other gene or allele combinations was observed (data not shown). A significantly increased cancer risk was observed among never smokers and among females having both rapid NAT1 and NAT2. This effect was predominantly caused by NAT1 genotype because individuals with rapid NAT1 and slow NAT2 had similar AORs as those with both rapid NAT1 and NAT2.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table VI. Joint effect of NAT and CYP1A2*1F on risk of pancreatic cancer

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
To our knowledge, the current study is the first to report a significant effect of the NAT1 gene and interactions of NAT1 and CYP1A2 genotypes with smoking on the risk for pancreatic cancer. We have shown that the NAT1 rapid acetylator genotype was associated with a significantly increased risk of pancreatic cancer among never smokers and among females. We have also shown that CYP1A2*1F C allele and NAT1 rapid acetylator genotypes in combination with heavy smoking were positively associated with an increased risk for pancreatic cancer among females. These observations support our hypothesis that the CYP1A2 and NAT gene polymorphisms modify the risk for smoking-related pancreatic adenocarcinomas, by altering the metabolism of AA and HCA tobacco carcinogens.

The frequency of the CYP1A2*1F polymorphism in several different populations has been reported. Among populations in Britain (21), Germany (22), Denmark (37), Egypt (38) and China (39), the C allele frequency was ~0.31–0.34. The frequency was relatively higher among Japanese (0.39) (available at www.imm.ki.se/CYPalleles/cyp1a2.htm) and Ethiopians (0.40) (40). In the USA, the only reported study was conducted among Hawaiian women, and the frequency was 0.30 (41). The C allele frequency among non-Hispanic white controls in our study was 0.31, which is quite comparable wih the reported frequencies.

The association between the CYP1A2*1F polymorphism and risk of cancer has previously been investigated in two studies. Neither the study of 49 colon cancer cases and 65 controls (22) nor the study of 164 ovarian cancer cases and 194 controls (41) demonstrated a significant association between this polymorphism and risk for cancer. The lack of cancer association in these studies could be related to their small sample sizes or the lack of exposure assessment because only the main effect was examined. Phenotype studies have suggested possible associations between higher CYP1A2 activity and risk for bladder cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma and colon cancer (19,42,43). Higher CYP1A2 activity has also been found to positively influence urinary mutagenicity among smokers and after consumption of pan-fried meat, a major source of HCA compounds (44). However, the functional significance of the CYP1A2*1F allele is not clear at present. One study found a higher enzyme activity associated with the A allele among smokers (21), another study found no difference in the enzyme activity and inducibility between the A and C alleles (40). Our study demonstrated that the C allele is the ‘at-risk’ allele. Whether and how the C allele affects enzyme activity and inducibility of CYP1A2 needs to be further investigated. It is possible that the CYP1A2*1F polymorphism modifies pancreatic cancer risk not through altered enzyme activity, but rather via linkage disequilibria with other genes that play an important role in tumorigenesis. As shown in a latest study (38), there are several other intron 1 polymorphisms of the CYP1A2 gene. Even though the A–164C polymorphism alone did not show any functional significance, significantly decreased enzyme activity and inducibility was observed among individuals with the haplotype of –164A, –740G and –730T, compared with those of other haplotypes, such as –164C, –740T and –730C; –164A and –740G; and –164A only (40). Information on the frequency and functional significance of the CYP1A2*1D allele is limited. We observed a significant interaction of the variant allele with heavy smoking among women in this study. Further investigation of the haplotypes and other SNPs of the CYP1A2 gene in our study population may help us to better understand the mechanisms underlying the association between CYP1A2 gene and increased cancer risk.

The current study observed that NAT1 rapid genotypes were associated with a significantly higher risk of pancreatic cancer among all study subjects, especially among never smokers and among females. On the other hand, rapid NAT1 genotypes in combination with heavy smoking resulted in a 3.0-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer compared with never smokers with the reference NAT1 genotypes. Previous studies have shown that NAT1 is the predominant NAT expressed in the human pancreas (29); however, the relationship between NAT1 genotype and phenotype is not well understood (25,27,28). Some studies suggest that NAT1*10 may be a rapid acetylator allele that has been associated with slight increases in NAT activity while other studies did not find such an association (25,27,28). Molecular epidemiological studies have found positive associations between the NAT1 rapid alleles (NAT1*10 and NAT1*11) and increased risk for bladder (45,46), colon (47–49), breast (50,51), prostate (52,53), gastric (54) and lung cancers (55). Results from the current study have added pancreatic cancer to this list. The increased cancer risk among NAT1 rapid allele carriers with heavy smoking can be explained by possible higher metabolic activation of tobacco carcinogens and consequently more reactive DNA damaging species in those individuals. The higher risk of cancer among never smokers associated with the NAT1 rapid allele suggests that carcinogen exposure other than cigarette smoking may be also involved in human pancreatic cancer. This notion is supported by epidemiological findings that higher consumptions of grilled/barbequed meats were associated with increased risk for pancreatic cancer (14,15), which implies a role of HCA exposure in this disease.

The current study observed a differential distribution of NAT1 rapid genotype among slow and rapid NAT2 acetylators, i.e. 41.5 and 25.3% in NAT2 rapid and slow controls, 51.8 and 32.5% in NAT2 rapid and slow cases, respectively. The higher frequency of NAT1*10 allele in NAT2 rapid acetylators has been previously reported in several studies (56–58). Because of the short distance between the two genes on the same chromosome, such a cosegregation of defined NAT1/NAT2 traits is not unlikely. Results of linkage analysis and haplotype analysis of NAT1/NAT2 genes are beyond the scope of the current manuscript and will be reported separately in the near future.

We also observed a higher risk for smoking-induced pancreatic cancer and a stronger interaction between CYP1A2/NAT genes and smoking in women than in men, suggesting that hormones or other gender-specific factors may play a role in mediating the effects of cigarette smoking on pancreatic carcinogenesis. Consistent with our findings, a previous study reported a stronger effect of GSTT1-null and heavy smoking on the risk for pancreatic cancer among women than men (6). In addition, epidemiologic studies have observed higher smoking-related relative risks of pancreatic cancer among women than among men (59,60). The mechanisms responsible for the sex-difference in susceptibility to smoking-related pancreatic cancer need further investigation.

There are some inherent limitations in this hospital-based case–control study. Since M.D. Anderson is a tertiary referral hospital, and as pancreatic cancer is rare, our control population was limited to patient companions from all over the country rather than a random sample from a defined population, which could potentially introduce selection bias. In addition, recall bias is another inherent limitation of the current study. Even though direct interview may reduce the information bias, the accuracy of assessments on cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption may still be subject to recall bias. Therefore, our observations need to be confirmed in a larger scale study and in another study population. If confirmed, our data support the hypothesis that individual variation in the metabolic activation of tobacco carcinogens poses an increased risk for pancreatic cancer, and women are more susceptible to such an effect than men.


   Acknowledgments
 
This study was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants CA98380 (to D.L.) and CA34627 (to D.W.H.), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences center grant P30 ES07784, NIH cancer center core grant CA16672, and a research grant from The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Conflict of Interest Statement: None declared.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. American Cancer Society (2004) Cancer facts and figures 2004.
  2. Anderson,K., Potter,J.D. and Mack,T.M. (1996) Pancreatic cancer. In Schottenfeld,D, Fraumeni,J.F.Jr, (eds), Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 725–771.
  3. Lee,H.C., Yoon,Y.B. and Kim,C.Y. (1997) Association between genetic polymorphisms of the cytochromes P-450 (1A1, 2D6, and 2E1) and the susceptibility to pancreatic cancer. Korean J. Intern. Med., 12, 128–136.[Medline]
  4. Bartsch,H., Malaveille,C., Lowenfels,A.B., Maisonneuve,P., Hautefeuille,A. and Boyle,P. (1998) Genetic polymorphism of N-acetyltransferases, glutathione S-transferase M1 and NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase in relation to malignant and benign pancreatic disease risk. The International Pancreatic Disease Study Group. Eur. J. Cancer Prev., 7, 215–223.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  5. Liu,G., Ghadirian,P., Vesprini,D., Hamel,N., Paradis,A.J., Lal,G., Gallinger,S., Narod,S.A. and Foulkes,W.D. (2000) Polymorphisms in GSTM1, GSTT1 and CYP1A1 and risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Br. J. Cancer, 82, 1646–1649.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  6. Duell,E.J., Holly,E.A., Bracci,P.M., Liu,M., Wiencke,J.K. and Kelsey,K.T. (2002) A population-based, case–control study of polymorphisms in carcinogen-metabolizing genes, smoking, and pancreatic adenocarcinoma risk. J. Natl Cancer Inst., 94, 297–306.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Blanck,H.M., Tolbert,P.E. and Hoppin,J.A. (1999) Patterns of genetic alterations in pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis. Environ. Mol. Mutagen, 33, 111–122.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  8. Sirivatanauksorn,V., Sirivatanauksorn,Y. and Lemoine,N.R. (1998) Molecular pattern of ductal pancreatic cancer. Langenbecks Arch. Surg., 383, 105–115.[ISI][Medline]
  9. Thompson,P.A., Seyedi,F., Lang,N.P., MacLeod,S.L., Wogan,G.N., Anderson,K.E., Tang,Y.M., Coles,B. and Kadlubar,F.F. (1999) Comparison of DNA adduct levels associated with exogenous and endogenous exposures in human pancreas in relation to metabolic genotype. Mutat. Res., 424, 263–274.[ISI][Medline]
  10. Fretland,A.J., Devanaboyina,U.S., Doll,M.A., Zhao,S., Xiao,G.H. and Hein,D.W. (2003) Metabolic activation of 2-hydroxyamino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine in Syrian hamsters congenic at the N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) locus. Toxicol Sci., 74, 253–259.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Fretland,A.J., Devanaboyina,U.S., Feng,Y., Leff,M.A., Xiao,G.H., Webb,S.J. and Hein,D.W. (2001) Oral administration of 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) yields PhIP-DNA adducts but not tumors in male Syrian hamsters congenic at the N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) locus. Toxicol Sci., 59, 226–230.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Fretland,A.J., Devanaboyina,U.S., Nangju,N.A., Leff,M.A., Xiao,G.H., Webb,S.J., Doll,M.A. and Hein,D.W. (2001) DNA adduct levels and absence of tumors in female rapid and slow acetylator congenic hamsters administered the rat mammary carcinogen 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b] pyridine. J. Biochem. Mol. Toxicol., 15, 26–33.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  13. Kaderlik,K.R., Minchin,R.F., Mulder,G.J., Ilett,K.F., Daugaard-Jenson,M., Teitel,C.H. and Kadlubar,F.F. (1994) Metabolic activation pathway for the formation of DNA adducts of the carcinogen 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) in rat extrahepatic tissues. Carcinogenesis, 15, 1703–1709.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Anderson,K.E., Sinha,R., Kulldorff,M., Gross,M., Lang,N.P., Barber,C., Harnack,L., DiMagno,E., Bliss,R. and Kadlubar,F.F. (2002) Meat intake and cooking techniques: associations with pancreatic cancer. Mutat. Res., 506–507, 225–31.
  15. Knekt,P., Steineck,G., Jarvinen,R., Hakulinen,T. and Aromaa,A. (1994) Intake of fried meat and risk of cancer: a follow-up study in Finland. Int. J. Cancer, 59, 756–760.[ISI][Medline]
  16. Eaton,D.L., Gallagher,E.P., Bammler,T.K. and Kunze,K.L. (1995) Role of cytochrome P4501A2 in chemical carcinogenesis: implications for human variability in expression and enzyme activity. Pharmacogenetics, 5, 259–274.[ISI][Medline]
  17. Foster,J.R., Idle,J.R., Hardwick,J.P., Bars,R., Scott,P. and Braganza,J.M. (1993) Induction of drug-metabolizing enzymes in human pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis. J. Pathol., 169, 457–463.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  18. Ulrich,A.B., Standop,J., Schmied,B.M., Schneider,M.B., Lawson,T.A. and Pour,P.M. (2002) Species differences in the distribution of drug-metabolizing enzymes in the pancreas. Toxicol Pathol., 30, 247–253.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  19. Landi,M.T., Sinha,R., Lang,N.P. and Kadlubar,F.F. (1999) Human cytochrome P4501A2. IARC Sci. Publ., 173–195.
  20. Chida,M., Yokoi,T., Fukui,T., Kinoshita,M., Yokota,J. and Kamataki,T. (1999) Detection of three genetic polymorphisms in the 5'-flanking region and intron 1 of human CYP1A2 in the Japanese population. Jpn. J. Cancer Res., 90, 899–902.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  21. Sachse,C., Bhambra,U., Smith,G., Lightfoot,T.J., Barrett,J.H., Scollay,J., Garner,R.C., Boobis,A.R., Wolf,C.R. and Gooderham,N.J. (2003) Polymorphisms in the cytochrome P450 CYP1A2 gene (CYP1A2) in colorectal cancer patients and controls: allele frequencies, linkage disequilibrium and influence on caffeine metabolism. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol., 55, 68–76.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  22. Sachse,C., Brockmoller,J., Bauer,S. and Roots,I. (1999) Functional significance of a C->A polymorphism in intron 1 of the cytochrome P450 CYP1A2 gene tested with caffeine. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol., 47, 445–449.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  23. Aitchison,K.J., Gonzalez,F.J., Quattrochi,L.C. et al. (2000) Identification of novel polymorphisms in the 5' flanking region of CYP1A2, characterization of interethnic variability, and investigation of their functional significance. Pharmacogenetics, 10, 695–704.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  24. Hein,D.W. (1988) Acetylator genotype and arylamine-induced carcinogenesis. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 948, 37–66.[Medline]
  25. Hein,D.W. (2002) Molecular genetics and function of NAT1 and NAT2: role in aromatic amine metabolism and carcinogenesis. Mutat. Res., 506–507, 65–77.
  26. Hein,D.W., Grant,D.M. and Sim,E. (2000) Update on consensus N-acetyltransferase gene nomenclature. Pharmacogenetics, 10, 291–292.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  27. Hirvonen,A. (1999) Polymorphic NATs and cancer predisposition. IARC Sci. Publ., 251–270.
  28. Hein,D.W., Doll,M.A., Fretland,A.J., Leff,M.A., Webb,S.J., Xiao,G.H., Devanaboyina,U.S., Nangju,N.A. and Feng,Y. (2000) Molecular genetics and epidemiology of the NAT1 and NAT2 acetylation polymorphisms. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., 9, 29–42.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Anderson,K.E., Hammons,G.J., Kadlubar,F.F. et al. (1997) Metabolic activation of aromatic amines by human pancreas. Carcinogenesis, 18, 1085–1092.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Doll,M.A. and Hein,D.W. (2002) Rapid genotype method to distinguish frequent and/or functional polymorphisms in human N-acetyltransferase-1. Anal. Biochem., 301, 328–332.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  31. Doll,M.A. and Hein,D.W. (2001) Comprehensive human NAT2 genotype method using single nucleotide polymorphism-specific polymerase chain reaction primers and fluorogenic probes. Anal. Biochem., 288, 106–108.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  32. Blum,M., Demierre,A., Grant,D.M., Heim,M. and Meyer,U.A. (1991) Molecular mechanism of slow acetylation of drugs and carcinogens in humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 88, 5237–5241.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Lo-Guidice,J.M., Allorge,D., Chevalier,D., Debuysere,H., Fazio,F., Lafitte,L.J. and Broly,F. (2000) Molecular analysis of the N-acetyltransferase 1 gene (NAT1*) using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment-single strand conformation polymorphism assay. Pharmacogenetics, 10, 293–300.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  34. Rothman,K.J., Greenland,S. and Walker,A.M. (1980) Concepts of interaction. Am. J. Epidemiol., 112, 467–470.[Free Full Text]
  35. Rothman,K.J. (1976) The estimation of synergy or antagonism. Am. J. Epidemiol., 103, 506–511.[Free Full Text]
  36. Garte,S., Gaspari,L., Alexandrie,A.K. et al. (2001) Metabolic gene polymorphism frequencies in control populations. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., 10, 1239–1248.[Medline]
  37. Christiansen,L., Bygum,A., Jensen,A., Thomsen,K., Brandrup,F., Horder,M. and Petersen,N.E. (2000) Association between CYP1A2 polymorphism and susceptibility to porphyria cutanea tarda. Hum. Genet., 107, 612–614.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  38. Hamdy,S.I., Hiratsuka,M., Narahara,K., Endo,N., El-Enany,M., Moursi,N., Ahmed,M.S. and Mizugaki,M. (2003) Genotyping of four genetic polymorphisms in the CYP1A2 gene in the Egyptian population. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol., 55, 321–324.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  39. Han,X.M., Chen,X.P., Wu,Q.N., Jiang,C.H. and Zhou,H.H. (2000) G-2964A and C734A genetic polymorphisms of CYP1A2 in Chinese population. Acta Pharmacol. Sin., 21, 1031–1034.[ISI][Medline]
  40. Lang,N.P., Butler,M.A., Massengill,J., Lawson,M., Stotts,R.C., Hauer-Jensen,M. and Kadlubar,F.F. (1994) Rapid metabolic phenotypes for acetyltransferase and cytochrome P4501A2 and putative exposure to food-borne heterocyclic amines increase the risk for colorectal cancer or polyps. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., 3, 675–682.[Abstract]
  41. Goodman,M.T., Tung,K.H., McDuffie,K., Wilkens,L.R. and Donlon,T.A. (2003) Association of caffeine intake and CYP1A2 genotype with ovarian cancer. Nutr. Cancer, 46, 23–29.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  42. Pavanello,S., Simioli,P., Mastrangelo,G., Lupi,S., Gabbani,G., Gregorio,P. and Clonfero,E. (2002) Role of metabolic polymorphisms NAT2 and CYP1A2 on urinary mutagenicity after a pan-fried hamburger meal. Food Chem. Toxicol., 40, 1139–1144.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  43. Kiyohara,C. (2000) Genetic polymorphism of enzymes involved in xenobiotic metabolism and the risk of colorectal cancer. J. Epidemiol., 10, 349–360.[Medline]
  44. Aklillu,E., Carrillo,J.A., Makonnen,E., Hellman,K., Pitarque,M., Bertilsson,L. and Ingelman-Sundberg,M. (2003) Genetic polymorphism of CYP1A2 in Ethiopians affecting induction and expression: characterization of novel haplotypes with single-nucleotide polymorphisms in intron 1. Mol. Pharmacol., 64, 659–669.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Taylor,J.A., Umbach,D.M., Castranio,T., Paulson,D., Robertson,C. Mohler,J.L. and Bell,D.A. (1998) The role of N-acetylation polymorphisms in smoking-associated bladder cancer: evidence of a gene–gene-exposure three-way interaction. Cancer Res., 58, 3603–3610.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Katoh,T., Inatomi,H., Yang,M., Kawamato,T., Matsumota,T. and Bell,D.A. (1999) Arylamine N-acetyltransferase 1 (NAT1) and 2 (NAT2) genes and risk of urothelial transitional cell carcinoma among Japanese. Pharmacogenetics, 9, 401–404.[ISI][Medline]
  47. Ishibe,N., Sinha,R., Hein,D.W., Kulldorff,M., Strickland,P., Fretland,A.J., Chow, W-H., Kadlubar,F.F., Lang,N.P. and Rothman,N. (2002) Genetic polymorphisms in heterocyclic amine metabolism and risk of colorectal adenomas. Pharmacogenetics, 12, 145–150.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  48. Bell,D.A., Stephens,E., Castranio,T., Umbach,D.M., Watson,M., Deakin,M., Elder,J., Duncan,H., Hendrickse,C. and Strange,R.C. (1995) Polyadenylation polymorphism in the N-acetyltransferase gene 1 (NAT1) increases risk of colorectal cancer. Cancer Res., 55, 3537–3542.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Chen,J., Stampfer,M.J., Hough,H.L., Garcia-Closas,M., Willett,W.C., Hennekens,C.H., Kelsey,K.T. and Hunter,D.J. (1998) A prospective study of N-acetyltransferase genotype, red meat intake, and risk of colorectal cancer. Cancer Res., 58, 3307–3311.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Millikan,R.C., Pittman,G.S., Newman,B., Tse,C.,-K.J., Selmin,O., Rockhill,B., Savitz,D., Moorman,P.G. and Bell,D.A. (1998) Cigarette smoking, N-acetyltransferases 1 and 2, and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., 7, 371–378.[Abstract]
  51. Krajinovic,M., Ghadirian. P., Richer,C., Sinnett,H., Gandini,S., Perret,C., Lacroix,A., Labuda,D. and Sinnett,D. (2001) Genetic susceptibility to breast cancer in French-Canadians: role of carcinogen-metabolizing enzymes and gene–environment interactions. Int. J. Cancer, 92, 220–225.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  52. Hein,D.W., Leff,M.A., Ishibe,N., Sinha,R., Frazier,H.A., Doll,M.A., Xiao,G.H., Weinrich,M.C. and Caporaso,N.E. (2002) Association of prostate cancer with rapid N-acetyltransferase 1 (NAT1*10) in combination with slow N-acetyltransferase 2 genotypes in a pilot case–control study. Environ. Mol. Mutagen, 40, 161–167.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  53. Fukutome,K., Watanaba,M., Shiraishi,T., Murata,M., Uemura,H., Kubota,Y., Kawamura,J., Ito,H. and Yatani,R. (1999) N-Acetyltransferase 1 genetic polymorphism influences the risk of prostate cancer development. Cancer Lett., 136, 83–87.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  54. Boissy,R.J., Watson,M.A., Umbach,D.M., Deakin,M., Elder,J., Strange,R.C. and Bell,D.A. (2000) A pilot study investigating the role of NAT1 and NAT2 polymorphisms in gastric adenocarcinoma. Int. J. Cancer, 87, 507–511.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  55. Wikman,H., Thiel,S., Jager,B., Schmezer,P., Spiegelhalder,B., Edler,L., Dienemann,H., Kayser,K., Schulz,V., Drings,P., Bartsch,H. and Risch,A. (2001) Relevance of N-acetyltransferase 1 and 2 (NAT1, NAT2) genetic polymorphisms in non-small cell lung cancer susceptibility. Pharmacogenetics, 11, 157–168.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  56. Cascorbi,I., Roots,I. and Brockmoller,J. (2001) Association of NAT1 and NAT2 polymorphisms to urinary bladder cancer: significantly reduced risk in subjects with NAT1*10. Cancer Res., 61, 5051–5056.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Henning,S., Cascorbi,I., Munchow,B., Jahnke,V. and Roots,I. (1999) Association of arylamine N-acetyltransferases NAT1 and NAT2 genotypes to laryngeal cancer risk. Pharmacogenetics, 9, 103–111.[ISI][Medline]
  58. Smelt,V.A., Mardon,H.J. and Sim,E. (1998) Placental expression of arylamine N-acetyltransferases: evidence for linkage disequilibrium between NAT1*10 and NAT2*4 alleles of the two human arylamine N-acetyltransferase loci NAT1 and NAT2. Pharmacol. Toxicol., 83, 149–157.[ISI][Medline]
  59. Muscat,J.E., Stellman,S.D., Hoffmann,D. and Wynder,E.L. (1997) Smoking and pancreatic cancer in men and women. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., 6, 15–19.[Abstract]
  60. Nilsen,T.I. and Vatten,L.J. (2000) A prospective study of lifestyle factors and the risk of pancreatic cancer in Nord-Trondelag, Norway. Cancer Causes Control, 11, 645–652.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Received April 7, 2005; revised June 16, 2005; accepted June 21, 2005.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
H. Suzuki, J. S. Morris, Y. Li, M. A. Doll, D. W. Hein, J. Liu, L. Jiao, M. M. Hassan, R. S. Day, M. L. Bondy, et al.
Interaction of the cytochrome P4501A2, SULT1A1 and NAT gene polymorphisms with smoking and dietary mutagen intake in modification of the risk of pancreatic cancer
Carcinogenesis, June 1, 2008; 29(6): 1184 - 1191.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
R. Z. Stolzenberg-Solomon, A. J. Cross, D. T. Silverman, C. Schairer, F. E. Thompson, V. Kipnis, A. F. Subar, A. Hollenbeck, A. Schatzkin, and R. Sinha
Meat and Meat-Mutagen Intake and Pancreatic Cancer Risk in the NIH-AARP Cohort
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2007; 16(12): 2664 - 2675.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
L. Jiao, M. A. Doll, D. W. Hein, M. L. Bondy, M. M. Hassan, J. E. Hixson, J. L. Abbruzzese, and D. Li
Haplotype of N-Acetyltransferase 1 and 2 and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2007; 16(11): 2379 - 2386.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
Y. Zang, M. A. Doll, S. Zhao, J. C. States, and D. W. Hein
Functional characterization of single-nucleotide polymorphisms and haplotypes of human N-acetyltransferase 2
Carcinogenesis, August 1, 2007; 28(8): 1665 - 1671.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
D. Li, R. S. Day, M. L. Bondy, R. Sinha, N. T. Nguyen, D. B. Evans, J. L. Abbruzzese, and M. M. Hassan
Dietary Mutagen Exposure and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2007; 16(4): 655 - 661.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
M. C. Cornelis, A. El-Sohemy, E. K. Kabagambe, and H. Campos
Coffee, Myocardial Infarction, and CYP Nomenclature--Reply
JAMA, August 16, 2006; 296(7): 765 - 766.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
27/1/103    most recent
bgi171v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal