Interactions between genes involved in the antioxidant defence system and breast cancer risk

The aim of the study is to examine the association between multilocus genotypes across 10 genes encoding proteins in the antioxidant defence system and breast cancer. The 10 genes are SOD1, SOD2, GPX1, GPX4, GSR, CAT, TXN, TXN2, TXNRD1 and TXNRD2. In all, 2271 cases and 2280 controls were used to examine gene–gene interactions between 52 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are hypothesised to tag all common variants in the 10 genes. The statistical analysis is based on three methods: unconditional logistic regression, multifactor dimensionality reduction and hierarchical cluster analysis. We examined all two- and three-way combinations with unconditional logistic regression and multifactor dimensionality reduction, and used a global approach with all SNPs in the hierarchical cluster analysis. Single-locus studies of an association of genetic variants in the antioxidant defence genes and breast cancer have been contradictory and inconclusive. It is the first time, to our knowledge, the association between multilocus genotypes across genes coding for antioxidant defence enzymes and breast cancer is investigated. We found no evidence of an association with breast cancer with our multilocus approach. The search for two-way interactions gave experiment-wise significance levels of P=0.24 (TXN [t2715c] and TXNRD2 [g23524a]) and P=0.58 (GSR [c39396t] and TXNRD2 [a442g]), for the unconditional logistic regression and multifactor dimensionality reduction, respectively. The experiment-wise significance levels for the three-way interactions were P=0.94 (GPX4 [t2572c], TXN [t2715c] and TXNRD2 [g23524a]) and P=0.29 (GSR [c39396t], TXN [t2715c] and TXNRD2 [a442g]) for the unconditional logistic regression and multifactor dimensionality reduction, respectively. In the hierarchical cluster analysis neither the average across four rounds with replacement of missing values at random (P=0.12) nor a fifth round with more balanced proportion of missing values between cases and controls (P=0.17) was significant

Immunohistochemical analysis of oxidative stress and DNA repair proteins in normal mammary and breast cancer tissues

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>During the course of normal cellular metabolism, oxygen is consumed and reactive oxygen species (ROS) are produced. If not effectively dissipated, ROS can accumulate and damage resident proteins, lipids, and DNA. Enzymes involved in redox regulation and DNA repair dissipate ROS and repair the resulting damage in order to preserve a functional cellular environment. Because increased ROS accumulation and/or unrepaired DNA damage can lead to initiation and progression of cancer and we had identified a number of oxidative stress and DNA repair proteins that influence estrogen responsiveness of MCF-7 breast cancer cells, it seemed possible that these proteins might be differentially expressed in normal mammary tissue, benign hyperplasia (BH), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive breast cancer (IBC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Immunohistochemistry was used to examine the expression of a number of oxidative stress proteins, DNA repair proteins, and damage markers in 60 human mammary tissues which were classified as BH, DCIS or IBC. The relative mean intensity was determined for each tissue section and ANOVA was used to detect statistical differences in the relative expression of BH, DCIS and IBC compared to normal mammary tissue.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that a number of these proteins were overexpressed and that the cellular localization was altered in human breast cancer tissue.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our studies suggest that oxidative stress and DNA repair proteins not only protect normal cells from the damaging effects of ROS, but may also promote survival of mammary tumor cells.</p

Sulforaphane Potentiates RNA Damage Induced by Different Xenobiotics

Background: The isothiocyanate sulforaphane (SFN) possesses interesting anticancer activities. However, recent studies reported that SFN promotes the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) as well as DNA breakage. Methodology/Principal Findings: We investigated whether SFN is able to damage RNA, whose loss of integrity was demonstrated in different chronic diseases. Considering the ability of SFN to protect from genotoxicity, we also examined whether SFN is able to protect from RNA damage induced by different chemicals (doxorubicin, spermine, S-nitroso-Nacetylpenicillamine, H2O2). We observed that SFN was devoid of either RNA damaging and RNA protective activity in human leukemic cells. It was able to potentiate the RNA damage by doxorubicin and spermine. In the first case, the effect was attributable to its ability of modulating the bioreductive activation of doxorubicin. For spermine, the effects were mainly due to its modulation of ROS levels produced by spermine metabolism. As to the cytotoxic relevance of the RNA damage, we found that the treatment of cells with a mixture of spermine or doxorubicin plus SFN increased their proapoptotic potential. Thus it is conceivable that the presence of RNA damage might concur to the overall toxic response induced by a chemical agent in targeted cells. Conclusions/Significance: Since RNA is emerging as a potential target for anticancer drugs, its ability to enhance spermineand doxorubicin-induced RNA damage and cytotoxicity could represent an additional mechanism for the potentiatin