XRCC1 and OGG1 Gene Polymorphisms and Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of Literature

AUTHORS

Ali Sanjari Moghaddam 1 , Milad Nazarzadeh 2 , Rezvan Noroozi 3 , Hossein Darvish 3 , Alireza Mosavi Jarrahi 1 , 2 , 4 , *

1 School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran

2 Iranian Research Center on Healthy Aging, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, IR Iran

3 Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran

4 Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, BC., Canada

How to Cite: Sanjari Moghaddam A, Nazarzadeh M, Noroozi R, Darvish H, Mosavi Jarrahi A. XRCC1 and OGG1 Gene Polymorphisms and Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of Literature, Int J Cancer Manag. 2016 ; 9(1):e3467. doi: 10.17795/ijcp-3467.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

International Journal of Medical Education: 9 (1); e3467
Published Online: February 23, 2016
Article Type: Review Article
Received: July 7, 2015
Revised: August 31, 2015
Accepted: November 9, 2015
Crossmark

Crossmark

CHEKING

READ FULL TEXT
Abstract

Context: Known polymorphisms of DNA repair genes can be associated with the risk of many types of cancer. There is no consensus regarding association between XRCC1 and OGG1 with breast cancer (BC).

Objectives: The aim of this study is to collect relevant published studies systematically.

Data Sources: Sixty-two publications were identified through searching PubMed, PubMed Central, ISI web of knowledge, and reference list of related articles.

Study Selection: We performed a systematic review according MOOSE guideline criteria. All longitudinal cohort and case-control studies investigating association of any type and grade of breast cancer with XRCC1 and OGG1 gene and their polymorphisms were eligible for initial inclusion.

Data Extraction: Two authors screened titles and abstracts and extracted all needed information from eligible studies. Four research methodological components causing bias for the association between gene polymorphisms and breast cancer risk, including source of controls sampling, population ethnicity, sample size of studies and menopausal status of cases and controls was used for assessment of quality of studies

Results: A total of 14,793 breast cancer cases and 15,409 controls were included in assessment of XRCC1 Arg194Trp. Four studies showed significant association and one study showed protective effect of XRCC1 Arg194Trp and BC. A total of 7,716 cases and 7,370 controls were included for XRCC1 Arg280His. Only one study showed significant association of XRCC1 Arg280His and breast cancer (OR = 1.82 (1.06 - 3.15). A total of 27,167 cases and 31,998 controls were included to estimate association between XRCC1 Arg399Gln polymorphism and breast cancer. Seven studies showed significant association and one showed protective effect of XRCC1 Arg399Gln and BC. A total of 9,417 cases and 11,087 controls were included for OGG1 Ser326Cys. Among studies focused on OGG1 Ser326Cys, none showed significant association with breast cancer.

Conclusions: Systematic search of major databases identify many studies addressing the relationship between BC and susceptible alleles in the base excision repair genes and the fact that there are many variations in the magnitude of association depending on inheritance model and the population of the study.

Keywords

Polymorphisms Breast Neoplasms OGG1 XRCC1

Copyright © 2016, Iranian Journal of Cancer Prevention.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. Context

Breast cancer (BC) counts the most common cause of cancer related death among women. The studies reported about 235303 new cases of BC and about 40430 death records per year in the United States (1). BC is the result of collaboration of many variables including environmental, reproductive, lifestyle, and genetic related factors (2) and approximately 10% of BC cases are attributed to genetic factors (3).

Mutations in high-penetrance genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53 and PTEN are demonstrated to contribute in BC susceptibility (4). However, they are counted only for 25% of inherited BC risk (5). A combined polymorphism effect of moderate and common low risk genes can clear remaining hereditary BC risk (6). Base-excision repair (BER) genes are an important subcategory of DNA repair genes, which fix DNA base damage due to X-rays, oxygen radicals, and alkylating agents (7). BER pathway excise oxidized DNA bases when oxidized DNA damage occur (8). Mutations in BER genes by cumulative effect of endogenous and exogenous mutagens result in apoptosis or cell overgrowth and cancer. Known polymorphisms of DNA repair genes can be associated with the risk of many types of cancer such as lung (9), colorectal (10), bladder (11), and BC (12). On the other hand, there are evidences demonstrating no association or protective effect of BER genes with breast cancer (11, 13, 14).

X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 gene (XRCC1) and 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase (OGG1) play an important role in base-excision repair pathway. XRCC1 acts in BER encoding scaffolding protein that assemble together proteins of the DNA repair complex (15, 16). Arg194Trp, Arg280His and Arg399Gln amino acid substitution are the most common studied single nucleotide polymorphisms of XRCC1. OGG1 encodes a DNA glycosylase, an important enzyme in the repair of 8-oxoguanine (17). Amino acid replacement of serine (Ser) with cysteine (Cys) at codon 326 (Ser326Cys, rs1052133) as a result of common C/G single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in exon 7 of hOGG1 gene is associated with decreased hOGG1 repair activity (18).

There are studies recommending variation in association of genetic polymorphisms and diseases in different ethnicities and geographical populations (19, 20). There is no consensus among researchers regarding association between XRCC1 (21-24) and OGG1 (12, 25, 26) with BC. A case-control study in the United States and Poland populations which evaluated association of BER genes with BC (27) showed no association for XRCC1 and OGG1 in both populations. While other studies (28) (29) suggested association of XRCC1 (codon 194, codon 280, and codon 399) and OGG1 (codon 326) with breast cancer.

2. Objectives

As such, we aimed to conduct a comprehensive systematic review to address the association of XRCC1 and OGG1 polymorphisms with breast cancer.

3. Data Sources

The systematic review was conducted according to the meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group’s criteria (30). To extract all studies around genetic polymorphisms and breast cancer, we performed a sensitive search in PubMed, PubMed central and ISI web of knowledge from their commencements until September 2014. The search was carried out using keywords “Breast Neoplasms”, “Breast Tumor”, “Human Mammary Neoplasm”, “Human Mammary Carcinoma”, “Cancer of Breast, Breast Cancer”, “Mammary Cancer”, “Malignant Neoplasm of Breast”, “Malignant Tumor of Breast”, “Breast Carcinoma”, “Cancer of the Breast”, “Ductal Carcinoma of Breast”, “Lobular Carcinoma of Breast”, “Medullary Breast Cancer”, “Breast Tumor” and “In Situ Breast Cancer” with Boolean “OR” between them combining “Polymorphism” with Boolean “AND” (each dataset detailed search string and retrieved results reported in Appendix 1). Search results were limited to human studies. We also performed contemporary hand search of reference lists of final retrieved studies, meta-analysis and systematic reviews.

4. Study Selection

All longitudinal cohorts (conventional cohort and historical cohort studies) and case-control studies (conventional case-control, case-cohort, nested case-control, matched case-control and unmatched case-control studies) investigating association of breast cancer with XRCC1 and OGG1 genes and their polymorphisms were eligible for initial inclusion. Also, all types (carcinomas, sarcomas) and grades (low, intermediate/moderate and high grade) of breast cancer were considered in this review. The criteria for exclusion of articles on the basis of title and abstract screening were: 1) Studies with no control group, 2) non-research articles (all type of letters, comments, and editorial), 3) animal studies, 4) case reports and case series studies, 5) considered occurrence of secondary/metastatic breast cancer or all-cause mortality as an outcome , 6) considered patients undergoing any type of intervention and 7) studies without breast cancer (pre/post-menopausal) as outcome. If the same population had been studied in two or more different studies (articles), we chose the most comprehensive and the most recent one.

5. Data Extraction

Two authors screened titles and abstracts and extracted all needed information from eligible studies after exclusion of duplicate titles. If there was a disagreement in each stage, three authors discussed conflicting results. EndNote X7 software was used to manage review and organize screening.

The following data were extracted from each study: name of first authors, date of publication, study design, source of controls, considered confounders in each models, genotyping methods, population ethnicity, total number of cases and controls, menopausal status of cases and controls, number of cases and controls according to genotypes and menopausal status, mean age of cases and controls, frequency of each genotypes separately and odds ratios for homozygote, heterozygote and combined model.

Because of the potential hazards of assessing the quality of studies using mechanical checklist and scoring the pre-considered item which is not made specifically for genetic epidemiology researches (31-34). For quality assessment procedure, we used four research methodological components causing bias for the association between gene polymorphisms and breast cancer risk, including source of controls sampling, population ethnicity, sample size of studies and menopausal status of cases and controls (Appendix 2 to 5). In order to minimize potential errors, considered data extracted on a former piloted Microsoft Excel worksheet, accompanied by predefined instructions for reviewers. In final stage, senior researcher re-checked extracted data. If clarifications and more information (or unavailable full texts) were needed, we contacted the first and corresponding author for additional data.

6. Results

6.1. Eligible Studies

A total of 2424 titles were identified in initial electronic search. After final screening, 45 eligible publications (including 49 studies) through primary search, 13 publications (14 studies) through hand search of references list of retrieved citations and 6 through an update search of databases were retrieved (Figure 1). Two studies (35, 36) were excluded because of having overlapping population with two others (37, 38). Overall, 62 publications (67 studies) were included in this study according to inclusion and exclusion criteria (12, 21-23, 25-29)(37-89). General characteristics of all eligible studies separated for each gene are provided in Appendix 6 to 9. Different ethnicities populations in the same study were considered as separated study populations (five publications comprised of two populations with different ethnicities) (27, 43, 47, 68, 83). From these, 35 studies worked on Arg194Trp, 12 studies evaluated Arg280His, 56 assessed Arg399Gln, and 19 studies focused on Ser326Cys. All studies consist of retrospective confirmed breast cancer cases and cancer-free controls and were published during 2001 to 2015. Among retrieved studies, 17 also presented information on menopausal status and six studies were conducted on postmenopausal women. Considering geographical location, 24 studies were carried out in North America, 21 in Europe, 19 in Asia, 2 in Latin America and 2 in Africa. To have a better view of measure of association, ORs were recalculated for five studies which did not take wild type as reference category (46, 52, 56, 74, 87), four studies because of stratification were based on family history of breast cancer (22, 44, 48, 86) and one because of stratification was based on recreational activity (63).

Flow Chart of the Reviewing Process for the Relationship Between Polymorphism and Breast Cancer
Figure 1. Flow Chart of the Reviewing Process for the Relationship Between Polymorphism and Breast Cancer

6.2. Arg194Trp

General characteristics of eligible studies are exhibited in Appendix 6. The 35 studies on Arg194Trp consisted of 14,793 breast cancer cases and 15,409 controls. Sample size of the studies ranged from 74 to 2,833 individuals. The largest sample size belonged to Zhang’s study (27) and Sterpone’s study had the lowest sample size (38). Tryptophan (Trp) allele frequency ranged from 0.03 to 0.53 in cases and 0.02 to 0.57 in controls. Most of the studies (16 of 35) were conducted in the United States of America. Clinic (or hospital) based case-control studies were the most common design (19 of 35). In addition, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism method (PCR- RFLP) was the most used genotyping method (20 of 35).

Among these 35 researches, four studies (28, 39, 70, 71)28, 39, 70, 71) showed significant association between Arg194Trp polymorphism and breast cancer comparing Trp carriers versus wild type and two (21, 59) showed marginally significant association. On the contrary, one study displayed protective effects (66). ORs ranged from not calculable (NC) (not enough number of exposed individuals) to 8.74 (adjusted) and NC to 3.87 (unadjusted) for homozygote versus wild type, from 0.44 to 4.42 (adjusted) and 0.35 to 4.59 (unadjusted) for heterozygote versus wild type and from 0.62 to 4.28 (adjusted) and 0.35 to 4.571 (unadjusted) for Trp carriers versus wild type. After considering stratification for menopausal status, only one study (28) reported significant association for post menopause and none showed association for premenopausal women. Oppositely, Patel (69) showed protective effect of Arg194Trp polymorphism on postmenopausal women (Table 1).

Table 1. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio of Studies Assessing the Association Between XRCC1 Arg194Trp Polymorphism and Breast Cancer
ReferencesMenopausal StatusTrp/Trp Versus Arg/ArgaArg/Trp Versus Arg/ArgaTrp/Trp and Arg/Trp Versus Arg/Arga
Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)
Duell E. J. (2001) (African-Americans) (47)Mix-NCb-0.64 (0.28 - 1.42)b0.70 (0.30 - 1.50)-
Duell E. J. (2001) (White) (47)Mix-NCb-0.75 (0.40 - 1.39)b0.70 (0.40 - 1.30)-
Kim S. U. (2002) (57)
Mix0.90 (0.48 - 1.67)-1.10 (0.76 - 1.73)--1.08 (0.71 - 1.62)b
Pre1.30 (0.57 - 2.95)-1.30 (0.74 - 2.18)--1.27 (0.74 - 2.18)b
Post0.50 (0.17 - 1.32)-1.00 (0.50 - 1.86)--0.83 (0.42 - 1.62)b
Han J. (2003) (51)Mix-1.33 (0.17 - 10.00)b-0.79 (0.61 - 1.03)b0.79 (0.60 - 1.04)0.81 (0.62 - 1.05)
Moullan N. (2003) (67)Mix1.61 (0.10 - 26.10)-0.95 (0.56 - 1.61)--1.02 (0.61 - 1.71)b
Smith T. R. (2003) (84)MixNC-1.47 (0.80 - 2.70)-1.60 (0.89 - 2.87)-
Smith T. R. (2003) (22)Mix-NCb-1.10 (0.58 - 2.02)b-1.12 (0.60 - 2.03)b
Deligezer U. (2004) (45)Mix-NC-0.41 (0.16 - 1.06)-0.47 (0.19 - 1.17)
Forsti A. (2004) (50)Mix-NC-1.27 (0.58 - 2.78)--
Chacko P. (2005) (28)
Mix2.78 (0.82 - 9.40)2.73 (0.81 - 9.20)1.89 (0.99 - 3.62)1.85 (1.01 - 3.38)2.04 (1.12 - 3.72)1.98 (1.13 - 3.48)
Pre----1.35 (0.55 - 3.25)-
Post----2.75 (1.28 - 5.90)-
Patel A. V. (2005) (69)Post----0.62 (0.40 - 0.95)0.66 (0.45 - 0.97)
Shen J. (2005) (81)
Mix----0.93 (0.72 - 1.21)-
Pre----0.78 (0.50 - 1.20)-
Post----1.00 (0.72 - 1.38)-
Brewster A. M. (2006) (41)Mix-NCb-1.69 (0.99 - 2.87)b1.20 (0.72 - 2.00)1.12 (0.69 - 1.83)
Pachkowski B. F. (African-Americans) (2006) (68)Mix0.70 (0.10 - 4.40)-1.00 (0.70 - 1.30)-1.00 (0.70 - 1.30)-
Pachkowski B. F. (Whites) (2006) (68)Mix0.90 (0.30 - 2.80)-0.90 (0.70 - 1.20)-0.90 (0.70 - 1.20)-
Thyagarajan B. (2006) (23)Mix0.98 (0.21 - 4.63)1.02 (0.23 - 4.57)1.23 (0.21 - 4.63)1.20 (0.77 - 1.87)1.21 (0.78 - 1.88)1.18 (0.77 - 1.81)
Zhang Y. (2006) (27)
Mix0.50 (0.20 - 1.40)-0.90 (0.80 - 1.20)--0.92 (0.73 - 1.15)b
Pre0.60 (0.00 - 10.30)-1.20 (0.80 - 1.80)--1.19 (0.81 - 1.77)b
Post0.50 (0.20 - 1.40)-0.80 (0.60 - 1.00)--0.75 (0.55 - 1.02)b
Silva S. N. (2007) (21)
Mix1.65 (0.10 - 27.43)2.00 (0.12 - 32.14)1.48 (0.95 - 2.32)1.46 (0.94 - 2.26)1.49 (0.95 - 2.31)1.47 (0.95 - 2.27)
PreNC0.05 (0.00 - 4.04)0.78 (0.16 - 3.68)0.83 (0.18 - 3.69)0.78 (0.16 - 3.68)0.81 (0.18 - 3.63)
Post------
Loizidou M. A. (2008) (60)Mix-0.95 (0.36 - 2.46)-1.02 (0.82 - 1.28)-1.02 (0.81 - 1.28)b
Mitra A. K. (2008) (66)Mix-0.41 (0.08 - 2.08)-0.35 (0.18 - 0.65)-0.35 (0.19 - 0.64)
Sangrajrang S. (2008) (29)
Mix0.70 (0.42 - 1.14)0.75 (0.47 - 1.20)1.08 (0.81 - 1.44)1.08 (0.82 - 1.41)1.01 ( 0.77 - 1.32)b
Pre0.88 (0.45 - 1.73)-1.23 (0.83 - 1.82)--1.15 (0.80 - 1.65)b
Post0.55 (0.26 - 1.16)-0.92 (0.60 - 1.42)--0.85 (0.56 - 1.28)b
Smith T. R. (Caucasian) (2008) (83)Mix8.74 (0.97 - 78.23)-1.21 (0.74 - 1.97)--1.34 (0.82 - 2.18)b
Smith T. R. (African-American) (2008) (83)MixNC-0.44 (0.12 - 1.67)--0.82 (0.23 - 2.73)b
Sobczuk A. (2009) (37)Post-0.71 (0.33 - 1.54)b-0.74 (0.36 - 1.50)b-0.73 (0.37 - 1.41)b
Ming-Shiean H. (2010) (65)Mix1.37 (0.87 - 2.17)1.36 (0.88 - 2.14)1.12 (0.84 - 1.47)1.09 (0.83 - 1.44)1.20 (0.87 - 1.62)1.17 (0.89 - 1.53)b
Sterpone S. (2010) (38)Mix-NC-1.82 (0.43 - 7.66)--
Zipprich J. (2010) (89)Mix----1.17 (0.61 - 2.25)-
Liu L. (2011) (59)Mix1.16 (0.84 - 1.59)-1.19 (0.99 - 1.44)-1.19 (0.99 - 1.41)-
Al Mutairi F. M. (2013) (39)Mix-NC-4.57 (1.47 - 14.21)-4.57 (1.47 - 14.21)
Przybylowska-Sygut K. (2013) (70)Mix-NC-1.91 (1.15 - 3.14)-1.94 (1.15 - 3.32)b
Ding P. (2014) (46)Mix-0.99 (0.66 - 1.48)b-0.93 (0.73 - 1.18)b0.94 (0.75 - 1.18)0.94 (0.74 - 1.18)b
McCullough L. E. (2014) (63)Post-----0.91 (0.62 - 1.32)b
Ramadan R. A. (2014) (71)Mix3.76 (1.07 - 13.17)3.87 (1.24 - 12.05)4.42 (2.08 - 9.41)4.59 (2.33 - 9.06)4.28 (2.11 - 8.70)4.45 (2.35 - 8.45)
Smolarz B. (2014) (85)Mix-0.89 (0.34 - 2.28)-0.59 (0.26 - 1.35)-0.68 (0.29 - 1.57)b
Macias-Gomez, N. M. (2015) (62)Mix-1.41 (0.64 - 3.14)-1.01 (0.71 - 1.44)-1.06 (0.76 - 1.48)

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NC, not calculable; OR, odds ratio.

aReferences category for calculation of odds ratio.

bORs calculated by authors via Stata software (version 13).

6.3. Arg280His

A total of 7,716 cases and 7,370 controls were studied for Arg280His. Zhang’s study (27) had the largest sample size (n = 2,802) and Smith’s study (83) (this study consists of two different ethnic populations and here the African American population was studied) had the lowest (n = 128). Histidine (His) allele had the least frequency among studies population comparing to other three alleles. His allele frequency ranged from 0.03 to 0.11 in cases and from 0.03 to 0.14 in controls. Six of studies (4 publications) were conducted in the United States of America (27, 68, 83, 89). Seven studies (six publications) had a clinic-based design and five (four publications) had a population-based design. Genotyping of four studies (28, 59, 60, 64) was carried out by PCR-RFLP (Appendix 7).

Results of Arg280His showed significant association between Arg280His polymorphism and breast cancer comparing His carriers versus wild type only in one study (67) with OR = 1.82 (1.06 - 3.15). ORs ranged from NC to 1.69 (adjusted) and NC to 4.68 (unadjusted) for homozygote versus wild type, from 0.55 to 1.80 (adjusted) and 0.56 to 1.13 (unadjusted) for heterozygote versus wild type and from 0.61 to 1.3 (adjusted) and 0.63 to 1.82 (unadjusted) for His carriers versus wild type. Stratification for menopausal status revealed marginally significant association in one study (29) (OR = 1.71 (0.94 - 3.10); P = 0.07) and protective association of Arg280His polymorphism in another study (28) (OR = 0.26 (0.1 - 0.66)) for post-menopausal women (Table 2).

Table 2. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio of Studies Assessing the Association Between XRCC1 Arg280His Polymorphism and Breast Cancer
ReferencesMenopausal StatusHis/His Versus Arg/Arg aArg/His Versus Arg/Arg aHis/His and Arg/His Versus Arg/Arg a
Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)
Moullan N. (2003) (67)MixNC-1.80 (1.04 - 3.08)--1.82 (1.06 - 3.15) b
Chacko P. (2005) (28)
Mix1.69 (0.29 - 9.63)1.79 (0.32 - 10.05)0.55 (0.29 - 1.03)0.56 (0.29 - 1.05)0.61 (0.33 - 1.12)0.63 (0.35 - 1.15)
Pre----1.44 (0.62 - 3.70)-
Post----0.26 (0.10 - 0.66)-
Metsola K. (2005) (64)Mix-NC b-1.13 (0.78 - 1.63) b1.15 (0.80 - 1.66)-
Pachkowski B. F. (African-Americans) (2006) (68)Mix1.10 (0.10 - 18.00)-1.30 (0.80 - 2.00)-1.30 (0.80 - 1.90)-
Pachkowski B. F. (White) (2006) (68)MixNC-1.20 (0.90 - 1.60)-1.20 (0.90 - 1.60)-
Zhang Y. (2006) (27)
Mix1.00 (0.20 - 4.30)1.10 (0.80 - 1.40)1.10 (0.85 - 1.44) b
Pre0.30 (0.00 - 3.50)-1.00 (0.60 - 1.40)--0.94 (0.62 - 1.43) b
Post2.20 (0.20 - 21.20)-1.10 (0.80 - 1.60)--1.14 (0.80 - 1.63) b
Loizidou M. A. (2008) (60)Mix-4.68 (1.01 - 21.70)-0.89 (0.71 - 1.11)-0.92 (0.73 - 1.15) b
Sangrajrang S. (2008) (29)
Mix----1.30 (0.88 - 1.93)1.09 (0.76 - 1.58)
Pre----0.99 (0.58 - 1.70)-
Post----1.71 (0.94 - 3.10)-
Smith T. R. (Caucasian) (2008) (83)MixNC-0.72 (0.43 - 1.21)--0.70 (0.40 - 1.19)b
Smith T. R. (African-American) (2008) (83)MixNC-0.66 (0.14 - 3.05)---
Zipprich J. (2010) (89)Mix----0.87 (0.38 - 2.00)-
Liu L. (2011) (59)Mix0.50 (0.21 - 1.18)-1.02 (0.81 - 1.28)-0.98 (0.78 - 1.22)-

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NC, not calculable; OR, odds ratio.

aReferences category for calculation of odds ratio.

bORs calculated by authors via Stata software.

6.4. Arg399Gln

Arg399Gln was the most popularly evaluated polymorphism and 27167 cases and 31998 controls were studied to estimate association between Arg399Gln polymorphism and breast cancer. The sample sizes ranged from 74 to 7,25 individuals in which the largest and smallest studies were carried out by Sapkota (79) and Sterpone (38), respectively. Glutamine (Gln) allele frequency ranged from 0.14 to 0.55 in cases and 0.11 to 0.57 in controls. 19 of 56 studies (16 publications) were conducted in the United States of America. Thirty-one studies used PCR-RFLP method for genotyping and thirty-three studies had clinic based study design (Appendix 8).

Among studies analyzing Arg399Gln, seven (28, 38, 47, 61, 71, 80, 86) showed significant association between Arg399Gln polymorphism and breast cancer comparing Gln carriers versus wild type. Although six studies (27, 29, 53, 62, 64, 66) showed a borderline association, just one (64) had P < 0.05. Conversly, Zipprich et al. (89) revealed protective effect of Arg399Gln on breast cancer risk (OR = 0.64 (0.41 - 1.00)). Calculated ORs ranged from 0.44 to 4.42 (adjusted) and 0.25 to 4.40 (unadjusted) for homozygote versus wild type, from 0.65 to 2.64 (adjusted) and 0.65 to 4.8 (unadjusted) for heterozygote versus wild type and from 0.64 to 2.89 (adjusted) and 0.60 to 4.66 (unadjusted) for Gln carriers versus wild type. Arg399Gln polymorphism showed to have an association with breast cancer in one study for Premenopausal women (28) and three for postmenopausal woman (61, 72, 74). Nonetheless, one study showed protective effect of Arg399Gln polymorphism for breast cancer risk (57). Details of extracted ORs are reported in Table 3.

Table 3. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio of Studies Assessing the Association Between XRCC1 Arg399Gln Polymorphism and Breast Cancer
ReferencesMenopausal StatusGln/Gln Versus Arg/ArgaArg/Gln Versus Arg/ArgaGln/Gln and Arg/Gln Versus Arg/Arga
Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)
Duell E. J. (African-Americans) (2001) (47)Mix-2.11 (0.52 - 9.99)b-1.54 (1.03 - 2.32)b1.70 (1.10 - 2.40)-
Duell E. J. (Whites) (2001) (47)Mix-0.84 (0.52 - 1.33)b-1.12 (0.81 - 1.54)b1.00 (0.80 - 1.40)-
Kim S. U. (2002) (57)Mix2.40 (1.20 - 4.72)0.80 (0.51–1.16)0.96 (0.63 - 1.44)b
Pre3.80 (1.44 - 10.30)1.20 (0.72–2.10)1.51 (0.87 - 2.60)b
Post1.40 (0.50 - 3.91)0.40 (0.19–0.74)0.50 (0.25 - 0.98)b
Han J. (2003) (51)Mix1.03 (0.77 - 1.37)1.06 (0.81 - 1.39)1.07 (0.88–1.30)1.06 (0.88 - 1.27)-1.04 (0.88 - 1.24)b
Moullan N. (2003) (67)Mix1.00 (0.57 - 1.76)-0.96 (0.66–1.40)--0.91 (0.64 - 1.29)b
Shu X. O. (2003) (82)Mix1.20 (0.85 - 1.69)1.22 (0.87 - 1.71)0.90 (0.76–1.08)0.92 (0.77 - 1.09)1.00 (0.84 - 1.18)b
Pre1.19 (0.78 - 1.80)1.20 (0.79 - 1.81)0.79 (0.63–0.98)0.79 (0.63 - 0.98)0.90 (0.73 - 1.10)b
post1.13 (0.61 - 2.11)1.19 (0.65 - 2.17)1.19 (0.87–1.62)1.21 (0.90 - 1.64)1.20 (0.90 - 1.62)b
Smith T. R. (2003) (84)Mix1.07 (0.58 - 1.96)-1.02 (0.70–1.51)-1.03 (0.71 - 1.49)-
Smith T. R. (2003) (22)Mix-1.09 (0.54 - 2.16)b-0.81 (0.53 - 1.25)b-0.86 (0.57 - 1.29)b
Deligezer U. (2004) (45)Mix-1.26 (0.61 - 2.61)-0.88 (0.53 - 1.47)-0.96 (0.59 - 1.56)
Figueiredo J. C. (2004) (49)Mix0.88 (0.57 - 1.37)0.92 (0.60 - 1.41)0.91 (0.67-1.23)0.92 (0.68 - 1.24)-0.92 (0.68 - 1.23)b
Forsti A. (2004) (50)Mix-0.89 (0.46 - 1.72)-1.10 (0.75 - 1.61)-1.06 (0.73 - 1.52)b
Huang C. S. (2004) (52)Mix1.92 (0.79 - 4.69)b0.99 (0.61 - 1.60)b1.11 (0.71 - 1.75)b
Chacko P. (2005) (28)Mix2.69 (1.10 - 6.57)2.66 (1.10 - 6.40)2.04 (1.16-3.58)2.02 (1.16 - 3.49)2.18 (1.30 - 3.66)2.14 (1.29 - 3.58)
Pre6.32 (2.90 - 13.73)
Post0.46 (0.36 - 1.57)
Dufloth R. M. (2005) (48)Mix-0.89 (0.26 - 2.85)b-0.84 (0.45 - 1.58)b-0.85 (0.47 - 1.54)b
Metsola K. (2005) (64)Mix1.39 (0.84 - 2.29)-1.24 (0.93–1.65)-1.26 (0.96 - 1.66)-
Patel A. V. (2005) (69)Post1.27 (0.79 - 2.02)1.08 (0.71 - 1.63)1.01 (0.73–1.39)0.95 (0.71 - 1.27)1.06 (0.78 - 1.44)0.98 (0.75 - 1.28)
Shen J. (2005) (81)Mix0.97 (0.73 - 1.29)1.08 (0.90-1.29)1.06 (0.89 - 1.26)
Pre1.03 (0.62 - 1.70)1.28 (0.93-1.75)1.23 (0.91 - 1.66)
Post1.01 (0.71 - 1.44)0.99 (0.79-1.24)0.99 (0.80 - 1.24)
Brewster A. M. (2006) (41)Mix1.22 (0.73 - 2.06)1.11 (0.67 - 1.83)1.64 (1.00–2.69)1.48 (0.92 - 2.38)-1.24 (0.88 - 1.75)b
Bu D. (2006) (42)Mix-1.10 (0.48 - 2.53)-0.98 (0.58 - 1.65)-1.00 (0.58 - 1.69)b
Pachkowski B. F. (African-Americans) (2006) (68)Mix1.80 (0.80 - 3.80)-1.10 (0.90-1.50)-1.20 (0.80 - 1.50)-
Pachkowski B. F. (Whites) (2006) (68)Mix1.00 (0.80 - 1.30)-1.10 (0.90-1.30)-1.10 (0.90 - 1.30)-
Thyagarajan B. (2006) (23)Mix0.91 (0.48 - 1.72)0.91 (0.49 - 1.70)1.29 (0.84–1.97)1.29 (0.85 - 1.95)1.20 (0.80 - 1.79)1.19 (0.80 - 1.77)
Zhai X. (2006) (88)Mix1.01 (0.60 - 1.70)0.79 (0.57-1.08)0.82 (0.61 - 1.11)
Pre0.83 (0.55 - 1.28)
Post0.82 (0.54 - 1.25)
Zhang Y. (USA) (2006) (27)Mix0.90 (0.80 - 1.10)1.10 (0.90-1.20)1.03 (0.92 - 1.15)b
Pre0.80 (0.60 - 1.10)1.00 (0.80-1.20)0.92 (0.77 - 1.11)b
Post1.10 (0.80 - 1.30)1.10 (0.90-1.30)1.09 (0.95 - 1.26)b
Zhang Y. (Poland) (2006) (27)Mix1.10 (0.90 - 1.40)1.10 (1.00-1.30)1.10 (0.97 - 1.25)b
Pre1.00 (0.70 - 1.50)1.20 (0.90-1.50)1.12 (0.88 - 1.44)b
Post1.10 (0.80 - 1.30)1.10 (0.90-1.30)1.08 (0.92 - 1.25)b
Costa S. (2007) (44)Mix0.95 (0.57 - 1.53)b0.65 (0.47 - 0.90)b1.64 (1.22 - 2.21)b
Silva S. N. (2007) (21)Mix0.87 (0.50 - 1.49)0.80 (0.47 - 1.36)0.87 (0.62–1.22)0.83 (0.60 - 1.16)0.87 (0.63 - 1.20)0.83 (0.60 - 1.13)
Pre0.52 (0.14 - 2.61)0.65 (0.14 - 3.04)0.49 (0.17–1.42)0.49 (0.17 - 1.35)0.50 (0.18 - 1.32)0.52 (0.20 - 1.32)
Post
Ali M. F. (2008) (40)Mix-3.54 (0.69 - 10.65)b-1.52 (0.51 - 4.59)b-2.05 (0.76 - 5.61)b
Kipikasova L. (2008) (58)Mix-0.95 (0.39 - 2.27)b-1.25 (0.68 - 2.29)b-1.17 (0.67 - 2.04)b
Loizidou M. A. (2008) (60)Mix-0.90 (0.68 - 1.18)-0.95 (0.80 - 1.14 )-0.94 (0.79 - 1.11)b
Mitra A. K. (2008) (66)Mix-2.91 (1.66 - 5.10)-0.91 (0.56 - 1.50)-1.41 (0.90 - 2.19)
Saadat M. (2008) (77)Mix1.80 (0.90 - 3.61)2.01 (1.02 - 3.94)0.76 (0.47–1.20)0.76 (0.49 - 1.18)0.93 (0.61 - 1.44)0.95 (0.63 - 1.42)
Pre1.93 (0.81 - 4.62)1.87 (0.81 - 4.37)0.88 (0.46–1.67)0.84 (0.45 - 1.56)1.09 (0.61 - 1.96)1.06 (0.60 - 1.85)
Post1.20 (0.23 - 6.07)1.03 (0.21 - 5.05)0.48 (0.18–1.31)0.46 (0.17 - 1.21)0.57 (0.22 - 1.48)0.53 (0.21 - 1.34)
Sangrajrang S. (2008) (29)Mix1.80 (0.99 - 3.29)1.74 (0.99 - 3.10)1.20 (0.90–1.60)1.17 (0.89 - 1.53)1.23 (0.94 - 1.61)b1.09
Pre1.45 (0.60 - 3.52)1.05 (0.71–1.55)(0.75 - 1.57)b
Post1.84 (0.79 - 4.28)1.30 (0.84–2.00)1.40 (0.93 - 2.11)b
Smith T. R. (Caucasian) (2008) (83)Mix0.93 (0.56 - 1.54)-1.01 (0.74-1.40)-1.00 (0.73 - 1.35)1.03 (0.75 - 1.40)b
Smith T. R. (African-American) (2008) (83)Mix2.19 (0.09 - 52.25)-1.13 (0.44-2.91)-1.18 (0.47 - 2.96)1.33 (0.53 - 3.29)b
Sobczuk A. (2009) (37)Post-0.89 (0.42 - 1.84)b-1.09 (0.54 - 2.18)b-0.99 (0.52 - 1.88)b
Syamala V. S. (2009) (86)Mix-1.58 (0.99-2.52)b-1.60 (1.15 - 2.23)b-1.59 (1.17 - 2.16)b
Jakubowska A. (2010) (54)Mix0.67 (0.36 - 1.25)0.67 (0.40 - 1.12)0.73 (0.48-1.10)0.85 (0.60 - 1.19)0.80 (0.57 - 1.13)b
Jelonek K. (2010) (55)Mix-0.94 (0.43 - 1.93)b-0.72 (0.44 - 1.20)b-0.77 (0.48 - 1.23)b
Ming-Shiean H. (2010) (65)Mix1.31 (0.83 - 1.96)1.26 (0.82 - 1.93)1.05 (0.81–1.38)1.03 (0.78 - 1.36)1.12 (0.87 - 1.42)1.07 (0.82-1.40)b
Romanowicz H. (2010) (74)Post-2.79 (1.51 - 5.21)b-1.29 (0.83 - 1.99)b-1.59 (1.06 - 2.40)b
Santos R. A. (2010) (78)Mix-0.25 (0.04 - 1.30)-0.73 (0.30 - 1.40)-0.60 (0.30 - 1.30)
Sterpone S. (2010) (38)Mix-4.40 (1.13 - 17.08)-4.80 (1.56 - 14.78)-4.66 (1.47 - 15.25)b
Zipprich J. (2010) (89)Mix0.44 (0.18 - 1.11)-0.65 (0.39-1.10)-0.64 (0.41 - 1.00)-
Liu L. (2001) (59)Mix0.91 (0.66 - 1.27)-0.87 (0.72–1.05)-0.88 (0.74 - 1.05)-
Roberts M. R. (2011) (72)Mix
Pre0.79 (0.44 - 1.42)0.88 (0.62 – 1.24)0.86 (0.62 - 1.20)
Post1.31 (0.94 - 1.83)1.22 (0.99 – 1.51)1.24 (1.01 - 1.51)
Hussien Y. M. (2012) (53)Mix1.60 (0.60 - 4.10)-1.70 (0.90 – 3.10)-1.70 (0.90 - 2.90)-
Al Mutairi F. M. (2013) (39)Mix-1.25 (0.46 - 3.39)-0.94 (0.51 - 1.72)-1.00 (0.57 - 1.75)
Przybylowska-Sygut K. (2013) (70)Mix-0.86 (0.46 - 1.60)-1.16 (0.76-1.78)-1.08 (0.70 - 1.65)b
Sapkota Y. (2013) (79)Mix1.11 (0.94 - 1.31)-1.12 (1.00 - 1.25)---
Ding P. (2014) (46)Mix-2.69 (1.71 - 4.31)b-0.89 (0.70 - 1.14)b1.10 (0.88 - 1.37)1.09 (0.87 - 1.38)b
Luo H. (2014) (61)Mix2.18 (1.06 - 4.50)1.52 (1.01 - 2.31)1.67 (1.12 - 2.47)
Pre0.77 (0.20 - 2.91)1.53 (0.66-3.51)1.33 (0.60 - 2.91)
Post2.57 (0.96 - 6.89)1.84 (1.08-3.15)1.94 (1.16 - 3.24)
McCullough L. E. (2014) (63)Post-----1.11 (0.87 - 1.42)b
Ramadan R. A. (2014) (71)Mix4.42 (1.28 - 15.31)3.56 (1.22 - 10.39)2.64 (1.20 – 5.08)2.62 (1.35 - 5.08)2.89 (1.35 - 6.21)2.77 (1.47 - 5.24)
Shadrina A. S. (2014) (80)Mix1.76 (1.21 - 2.57)-1.17 (0.92 – 1.51)-1.29 (1.02 - 1.63)-
Macias-Gomez (2015)N. M. (62)Mix-2.71 (1.44 - 5.10)-1.10 (0.80 - 1.51)-1.27 (0.94 - 1.72)

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; USA, United States of America.

aReferences category for calculation of odds ratio.

bORs calculated by authors via Stata software (version 13).

6.5. Ser326Cys

A total of 9,417 cases and 11,087 controls were founded to be considered for Ser326Cys. Respectively, Roberts’ study (72) and Sterpone’s (38) study had the largest and smallest sample sizes of 2,941 and 74 individuals. Cysteine (Cys) allele was the most prevalent allele in this study and Cys frequency ranged from 0.21 to 0.63 in cases and 0.21 and 0.68 in controls. About half of studies of Ser326Cys polymorphism were conducted in Asia, particularly on Chinese populations. Design of 13 studies (12 publications) was clinic based (Appendix 9).

Among studies focusing on Ser326Cys, none showed significant association between Ser326Cys polymorphism and breast cancer comparing Cys carriers to wild type. Calculated ORs ranged from 0.69 to 1.70 (adjusted) and 0.22 to 1.46 (unadjusted) for homozygote versus wild type, from 0.82 to 1.20 (adjusted) and 0.33 to 1.37 (unadjusted) for heterozygote versus wild type and from 0.76 to 1.21 (adjusted) and 0.28 to 1.28 (unadjusted) for Cys carriers versus wild type. Stratification for menopausal status exhibited no significant association between Ser326Cys and breast cancer in pre and post-menopausal women, but Romanowicz-Makowska (75) showed protective effect in post-menopausal women (OR = 0.49 (0.24 - 0.98)) (Table 4).

Table 4. Adjusted and Unadjusted Odds Ratio of Studies Assessing the Association Between OGG1 Ser326Cys Polymorphism and Breast Cancer
First AuthorMenopausal StatusCys/Cys Versus Ser/SeraSer /Cys Versus Ser/SeraCys/Cys and Ser /Cys Versus Ser/Sera
Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)Unadjusted OR (95% CI)
Choi J. Y. (Korean) (2003) (43)
Mix1.20 (0.71 - 2.00)-0.90 (0.59 - 1.53)--0.94 (0.59 - 1.49)b
Pre1.10 (0.57 - 2.22)-1.00 (0.56 - 1.93)--1.03 (0.55 - 1.91)b
Post1.10 (0.46 - 2.45)-0.70 (0.34 - 1.63)--0.77 (0.37 - 1.64)b
Choi J. Y. (Japanese) (2003) (43)
Mix1.70 (0.93 - 2.96)-1.20 (0.76 - 1.95)--1.28 (0.81 - 2.02)b
Pre1.90 (0.75 - 4.90)-1.30 (0.63 - 2.69)--1.32 (0.65 - 2.66)b
Post1.30 (0.61 - 2.98)-1.20 (0.64 - 2.42)--1.23 (0.65 - 2.34)b
Vogel U. (2003) (26)Post-0.98 (0.52 - 1.86)-0.84 (0.64 - 1.10)-0.85 (0.64 - 1.13)b
Huang C. S. (2004) (52)Mix-0.82 (0.42 - 1.61)b-0.90 (0.48 - 1.71)b-0.86 (0.48 - 1.58)b
Cai Q. (2006) (25)
Mix1.06 (0.83 - 1.35)-1.17 (0.93 - 1.47)--1.10 (0.88 - 1.38)b
Pre0.99 (0.74 - 1.34)-1.08 (0.81 - 1.43)--1.04 (0.79 - 1.37)b
Post1.18 (0.77 - 1.81)-1.37 (0.91 - 2.07)--1.26 (0.84 - 1.88)b
Rossner P., Jr. (2006) (76)Mix1.01 (0.68 - 1.52)0.99 (0.66 - 1.47)1.06 (0.88 - 1.28)1.04 (0.87 - 1.24)-1.02 (0.86 - 1.22)b
Zhang Y. (2006) (27)
Mix1.00 (0.70 - 1.40)-1.00 (0.80 - 1.20)--0.98 (0.83 - 1.14)b
Pre0.90 (0.50 - 1.50)-1.10 (0.80 - 1.40)--1.02 (0.78 - 1.32)b
Post1.20 (0.70 - 1.90)-1.00 (0.80 - 1.20)--1.01 (0.82 - 1.25)b
Romanowicz-Makowska H. (2008) (75)Post-0.62 (0.28 - 1.38)b-0.40 (0.18 - 0.87)b-0.49 (0.24 - 0.98)b
Sangrajrang S. (2008) (29)
Mix1.42 (0.97 - 2.09)1.46 (1.02 - 2.10)0.95 (0.67 - 1.34)0.99 (0.72 - 1.37)-1.14 (0.83 - 1.56)b
Pre1.13 (0.67 - 1.91)-0.92 (0.58 - 1.48)--1.12 (0.72 - 1.73)b
Post2.05 (1.14 - 3.69)-0.97 (0.58 - 1.61)--1.17 (0.72 - 1.89)b
Synowiec E. (2008) (87)Mix-0.22 (0.04 - 1.04)b-0.33 (0.06 - 1.40)b-0.28 (0.05 - 1.10)b
Ming-Shiean (2010)H. (65)Mix1.09 (0.74 - 1.59)1.09 (0.74 - 1.63)0.97 (0.66 - 1.42)0.99 (0.67 - 1.47)1.04 (0.80 - 1.46)1.02 (0.71 - 1.48)b
Sterpone S. (2010) (38)Mix-0.83 (0.10 - 6.65)-1.37 (0.53 - 3.56)-1.03 (0.46 - 3.64)b
Roberts M. (2011)R. (72)
Mix------
Pre1.17 (0.53 - 2.54)-1.00 (0.72 - 1.38)-1.01 (0.74 - 1.38)-
Post1.19 (0.77 - 1.85)-0.97 (0.79 - 1.19)-0.99 (0.82 - 1.21)-
Kim K. Y. (2013) (57)Mix-0.83 (0.53 - 1.30)b-0.95 (0.66 - 1.38)b0.90 (0.64 - 1.27)0.91 (0.64 - 1.30)b
Xie H. (2013) (12)
Mix-1.34 (0.97 - 1.84)-1.10 (0.82 - 1.49)-1.19 (0.88 - 1.60)b
Pre-1.87 (1.14 - 3.06)-1.08 (0.68 - 1.72)-1.34 (0.84 - 2.15)b
Post-1.18 (0.73 - 1.89)-1.02 (0.66 - 1.57)-1.07 (0.69 - 1.65)b
Luo H. (2014) (61)
Mix0.69 (0.40 - 1.19)-0.82 (0.48 - 1.38)-0.76 (0.46 - 1.24)-
Pre0.41 (0.14 - 1.18)-0.58 (0.21 - 1.64)-0.49 (0.19 - 1.27)-
Post0.83 (0.40 - 1.70)-1.01 (0.51 - 1.99)-0.93 (0.49 - 1.76)-
McCullough L. E. (2014) (63)Post-----0.98 (0.77 - 1.25)b
Rodrigues P. (2014) (73)Mix----1.82 (1.31 - 2.52)c-
Smolarz B. (2014) (85)Mix-0.93 (0.34 - 2.51)-1.02 (0.45 - 2.34)-1.00 (0.42 - 2.37)b

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

aReferences category for calculation of odds ratio.

bORs calculated by authors via Stata software (version 13).

cCys/Cys versus Ser /Cys and Ser/Ser; Cys/Cys as reference category.

As part of a systematic review to address variations seen in the association between polymorphic genes involved in base excision repair pathway and risk of breast cancer, we identified all studies indexed in PubMed and Web of Sciences in which the risk of barest cancer for carriers of susceptibility alleles of XRCC1 and OGG1 genes were investigated. Collectively, there were 62 studies assessing the BER gene polymorphism in different population providing a wealth of information to look at the cause of variation in allele frequency as well as the magnitude of association between this polymorphic genes and breast cancer.

Etiology of breast cancer is characterized with major influence of endogenic estrogen exposure and gens involved in cancer susceptibility or genes involved in different pathways of estrogen metabolism (90). The lifestyle and environmental factors play important role in modifying the magnitude of estrogen exposure in a background of several susceptibility genes (91). The highly penetrate genes of BRCA1 and BRCA2 accounts for up to 25% of inherited breast cancer (where not more than 10% of breast cancer are considered as familial and inherited) (92, 93). The involvement of low-penetrate susceptibility polymorphic genes involved in the pathophysiologic pathways of breast tumor genesis play major role in sporadic breast cancer (94). The polymorphic genes can be involved in several cellular mechanisms especially estrogen metabolism pathways, detoxification of xenobiotic, cell adhesion, and DNA damage and repair signaling. While polymorphic genes involved in estrogen metabolism are very specific to breast cancer susceptibility, polymorphic genes involved in DNA repair and damage play an important role in the etiology of many cancers including breast (95). Among the many polymorphic genes involved in the etiology of breast cancer, Base excision repair polymorphic genes shows especially important role as a mechanism involved in repairing endogenous driven DNA damage, which may originate from wide range of normal metabolism. The magnitude of association (expressed as odds ratio in case-control and rate ration in cohort studies) between low penetrance genes and risk of cancer is very small and barely ranges more than 1.5. From population standpoint, the small magnitude of association seen between the susceptibility allele and risk of cancer is aggregated into an important causal factor in the light of high prevalence of susceptibility allele. As the systematic review result, the prevalence of susceptibility allele in controls group for XCCR1 Arg194Trp ranged from 2% in populations of Finland (50) and Saudi Arabia (39) to 57% in the population of Poland (37). For XRCC1 Arg280His the prevalence ranged between 3% in African-American population of USA (68) to 14% in population of India (28). For XRCC1 Arg399Gln, the prevalence ranged between 11% for African-American population of the US (83) to 57% for the population of Poland (37). For OGG1 Ser326Cys, the prevalence ranged between 21% for populations of Spain (73) and USA (27) to 68% for the population of Poland (87). The distribution of a susceptibility allele in a population is supposed to follow the Hardy-Weinberg law, unless a known population stratification or funder effect disturbs the HWE law (96). In studies of association between a susceptible allele and risk of cancer when there is no indication of population stratification or funder effect, the differential frequency of the susceptibility allele among the diseased compared to non-diseased provides the bases for association studies. Lack of HWE law in distribution of susceptible allele confounds any study assessing association between susceptibility allele and cancer risk (97, 98). In our systematic review, it was observed that HWE law was assessed for all the studies.

In association studies of susceptibility allele and risk of breast cancer, controlling other risk factors such as risk factors related to life style and hormonal play an important role. Many studies reviewed in this systematic review included control for known risk factors; in some studies, the analysis were done based on subgroup analysis and some studies used statistical modeling. Studies included in our analysis control extraneous risk factors either through subgroup analysis (grouping the study subjects into pre and post menopause) or by using multivariable models. Many of the studies were case-control studies some of which were population and clinical based studies. As population based case and controls are less prone to bias, our systematic review identifies many studies whose results can be used for further studies such as met-analysis.

In epidemiology, systematic reviews are done for different purposes. Our systematic review’s aim was to identify all studies that assessed the relationship between risk of breast cancer and susceptibility alleles of main base excision repair genes (XRCC1 and OGG1). The systematic approach makes sure that all studies are included and properly evaluated. The fact that our systematic review was able to use major databases (PubMed and Web of Sciences) indicates that we were able to identify all studies indexed in these two databases which cover a large part of English language indexed publications. The inclusion of two databases and manual search of the references of other systematic reviews and meta analyses have lower chances of missing major and important studies indicating high degrees of completeness.

The measure of association was another factor, which may be different among different populations. The difference depends on the frequency and magnitude of other modifying factors effecting and interacting with the BER genes. Our systematic review reveals that, the association between risk of breast cancer and XCRR1 and OGG1 susceptible allele depended on the model of inheritance and different model can show different effects on different population. Further studies are needed to assess the effect(s) of inheritance model on the risk of breast cancer.

7. Conclusions

Systematic search of major databases identify many studies addressing the relationship between breast cancer and susceptible alleles in the base excision repair genes and the fact that there are many variations in the magnitude of association depending on model of inheritance and the population of the study.

Timeframe of Search

The initial sensitive electronic search was performed from database commencement to 04 Sept 2014. The search updated in 22 April 2015. The details of strategy are shown in Appendix A1 (below table).

Appendix A1. Details of Electronic Search Strategy a
DatabaseSearch StrategyN
PubMed/NLM(“Polymorphism”) AND (“Breast Neoplasms” OR “Breast Tumor” OR “Human Mammary Neoplasm” OR “Human Mammary Carcinoma” OR “Cancer of Breast” OR “Breast cancer” OR “Mammary Cancer” OR “Malignant Neoplasm of Breast” OR “Malignant Tumor of Breast” OR “Breast Carcinoma” OR “Cancer of the Breast” OR “Ductal carcinoma of breast” OR “Lobular Carcinoma of breast” OR “Medullary breast cancer” OR “Breast tumor” OR “In Situ breast cancer”)5345
PMC/NLM(“Polymorphism”[ti]) AND (“Breast Neoplasms” [ti] OR “Breast Tumor” [ti] OR “Human Mammary Carcinoma” [ti] OR “Cancer of Breast”[ti] OR “Breast cancer”[ti] OR “Mammary Cancer”[ti] OR “Malignant Neoplasm of Breast”[ti] OR “Malignant Tumor of Breast”[ti] OR “Breast Carcinoma”[ti] OR “Cancer of the Breast”[ti] OR “Ductal carcinoma of breast”[ti] OR “Lobular Carcinoma of breast”[ti] OR “Medullary breast cancer”[ti] OR “Breast tumor”[ti] OR “In Situ breast cancer”[ti])138
ISI Web of Science/Thomson Reuters(Polymorphism a breast cancer) Refined by: LANGUAGES: ( ENGLISH ) AND Databases: ( WOS ) AND RESEARCH AREAS: ( ONCOLOGY OR GENETICS HEREDITY OR BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OR GERIATRICS GERONTOLOGY ) AND DOCUMENT TYPES: ( ARTICLE OR REVIEW OR CORRECTION ) Timespan: All years.1501

a Calculated OR for different strata, but data not shown.

Appendix A2. Quality of Studies Assessing the Association Between Ser326Cys Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a,b
Study (year)Source of ControlPopulation EthnicitySample SizeMenopausal StatusHWE Reported
Choi (2003)+++++
Vogel (2003)+-+++
Huang (2004)+-+--
Cai (2006)+++++
Rossner (2006)+-+A+
Zhang (2006)+++++
Sangrajrang (2008)+-+++
Synowiec (2008)--+-+
Romanowicz-Makowska (2008)--+++
Ming-Shiean (2010)+-+-+
Sterpone (2010) B++-+
Roberts (2011)+A,C+++
Kim (2013)+-+-+
Xie (2013)+++++
Luo (2014)+++++
McCullough (2014)+D+++
Rodrigues (2014)+++-+
Smolarz (2014)+-+-+

a Definitions: Year, year of publication; Source of control means clinic (or hospital) based or population based; population ethnicity means Caucasian, African-American and other ethnicity; Sample size means calculable sample size; Menopausal status means adjustment of menopausal status (post, pre or both) for final measure of association using methods such as adjustment in regression models, restriction, stratification etc; HWE (Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium) means calculated or reported HWE equilibrium.

b A, Adjusted, but no detail presented; B, Source of controls: volunteers; C, Matched controls, but no detail presented; D, Only mentioned to ethnicity without adjustment.

Appendix A3. Quality of Studies Assessing the Association Between XRCC1 Arg194Trp Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a,b
Study (year)Source of ControlPopulation EthnicitySample SizeMenopausal StatusHWE Reported
Duell (2001)+++A+
Kim (2002)+-+++
Han (2003)+B+C+
Smith (2003) +++-+
Smith (2003) +++-+
Moullan (2003)+-+-+
Forsti (2004)+-+-+
Deligezer (2004)--+-+
Chacko (2005)+-+++
Shen (2005)+A+++
Patel (2005)+BD+++
Pachkowski (2006)+++-+
Thyagarajan (2006)+-+-+
Brewster (2006)+++C+
Zhang (2006)+++++
Silva (2007)+++++
Smith (2008)+++-+
Sangrajrang (2008)+-+++
Mitra (2008)E++D+
Loizidou (2008)E++-+
Sobczuk (2009)--+++
Zipprich (2010)+D+C+
Ming-Shiean (2010)+-+-+
Sterpone (2010) E++-+
Liu (2011)+++-+
Przybylowska-Sygut (2013)+-+-+
Al Mutairi (2013)+D+-+
Ding (2014)+++-+
McCullough (2014)+B+++
Ramadan (2014)+-+A+
Smolarz (2014)+-+-+
Macias-Gomez (2015)--+-+

a Definitions:Year, year of publication; positive sign (+), mentioned in the articles; negative sign (-), not mentioned in the article; Source of control means clinic (or hospital) based or population based; Population ethnicity means Caucasian, African-American and other ethnicity; sample size means calculable sample size; Menopausal status means adjustment of menopausal status (post, pre or both) for final measure of association using methods such as adjustment inregression models, restriction, stratification etc; HWE (Hardy Weinberg equilibrium) means calculated or reported HWE equilibrium.

b A, Calculated OR for different strata, but data not shown; B, Only mentioned to ethnicity without adjustment; C, Adjusted, but no detail presented; D, Matched controls, but no detail presented; E, Source of controls: volunteers.

Appendix A4. Quality of Studies Assessing the Association Between Arg280His Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a,b
Study (year)Source of ControlPopulation EthnicitySample SizeMenopausal StatusHWE Reported
Moullan (2003)+-+-+
Chacko (2005)+-+++
Metsola (2005)+++A+
Pachkowski (2006)+++-+
Zhang (2006)+++++
Smith (2008)+++-+
Loizidou (2008)B++-+
Sangrajrang (2008)+-+++
Zipprich (2010)+C+D+
Liu (2011)+++-+

a Definitions: Year, year of publication; Source of control means clinic (or hospital) based or population based; Population ethnicity means Caucasian, African-American and other ethnicity; Sample size means calculable sample size; Menopausal status means adjustment of menopausal status (post, pre or both) for final measure of association using methods such as adjustment in regression models, restriction, stratification etc; HWE (Hardy Weinberg equilibrium) means calculated or reported HWE equilibrium.

b A, Calculated OR for different strata, but data not shown; B, Source of controls: volunteers; C, Matched controls, but no detail presented; D, Adjusted, but no detail presented.

Appendix A5. Quality of Studies Assessing the Association Between Arg399Gln Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a,b
Study (year)Source of ControlPopulation EthnicitySample SizeMenopausal StatusHWE Reported
Duell (2001)+++A+
Kim (2002)+-+++
Han (2003)+B+C+
Shu (2003)+++++
Smith (2003) +++-+
Smith (2003) +++-+
Moullan (2003)+-+-+
Deligezer (2004)--+-+
Figueiredo (2004)+B,C+-+
Forsti (2004)+-+-+
Huang (2004)+-+--
Metsola (2005)+++A+
Chacko (2005)+-+++
Dufloth (2005)D-+--
Patel (2005)+BE+++
Shen (2005)+A+++
Brewster (2006)+++C+
Bu (2006)+B+-+
Pachkowski (2006)+++-+
Thyagarajan (2006)+-+-+
Zhai (2006)+++++
Zhang (2006)+++++
Costa (2007)+-+-+
Silva (2007)+++++
Ali (2008)+-+--
Kipikasova (2008)D++-+
Mitra (2008)D++E+
Loizidou (2008)D++-+
Saadat (2008)-++++
Smith (2008)+++-+
Sangrajrang (2008)+-+++
Sobczuk (2009)--+++
Syamala (2009)+-+--
Jelonek (2010)+++-+
Jakubowska (2010)+-+--
Ming-Shiean (2010)+-+-+
Sterpone (2010) D++-+
Santos (2010)D-+-+
Romanowicz (2010)--+++
Zipprich (2010)+E+C+
Liu (2011)+++-+
Roberts (2011)+C,E+++
Hussien (2012)+-+-+
Al Mutairi (2013)+E+-+
Sapkota (2013)+++-+
Przybylowska-Sygut (2013)+-+-+
Ding (2014)+++-+
Luo (2014)+++++
Ramadan+-+A+
Shadrina (2014)+++-+
Macias-Gomez (2015)--+-+

a Year, year of publication; Source of control means clinic (or hospital) based or population based; Population ethnicity means Caucasian, African-American and other ethnicity; Sample size means calculable sample size; Menopausal status means adjustment of menopausal status (post, pre or both) for final measure of association using methods such as adjustment in regression models, restriction, stratification etc; HWE (Hardy Weinberg equilibrium) means calculated or reported HWE equilibrium.

b A, Calculated OR for different strata, but data not shown; B, Only mentioned to ethnicity without adjustment; C, Adjusted, but no detail presented; D, Source of controls: volunteers; E, Matched controls, but no detail presented.

Appendix A6. Characteristics of Literature Included in the Systematic Review Evaluating the Association Between XRCC1 Arg194Trp Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a
First AuthorDateCountryEthnicityStudy DesignControl SourceGenotyping MethodsAnalyzed Sample Size (Case Number)Minor Allele Frequency (Case/Control)Considered Confounders b
Duell, E. J.2001USAAfrican-Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedmultiplex PCR-RFLP and 59-exoncuclease (Taqman)327 (161)(0.05/0.06)age
Duell, E. J.2001USAWhitespopulation basedpopulation basedmultiplex PCR-RFLP and 59-exoncuclease (Taqman)485 (251)(0.05/0.06)age
Kim, S. U.2002KoreaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP410 (205)(0.34/0.34)breast feeding, family history of breast cancer and menopausal status at baseline
Han, J.2003USACaucasian, Southern European, Scandinavian, Asians, Hispanics, and African Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedpyrosequencing, RFLP, and the 5 nuclease assay (TaqMan)2367 (998)(0.05/0.06)age; menopausal status; postmenopausal hormone use; date of blood draw; time of blood draw; fasting status, body mass index at age 18 years, weight gain since age 18 years, age at menarche, age at menopause, parity/age at first birth, first-degree family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, alcohol intake, during smoking, and duration of postmenopausal hormone use
Moullan, N.2003FranceNShospital basedpopulation basedTaqMan technology or variant specific restriction enzyme digestion566 (254)(0.07/0.06)age
Smith, T. R. 2003USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP512 (246)(0.07/0.04)age, family history, age at menarche, age at first live birth, and body mass index
Smith, T. R. 2003USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP463 (162)(0.07/0.06)age
Deligezer, U.2004TurkeyNSNSNSmultiplex PCR284 (151)(0.03/0.05)-
Forsti, A.2004FinlandNSNSpopulation basedPCR-RFLP521 (223)(0.03/0.02)-
Chacko, P.2005IndiaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP and DNA sequencing techniques246 (123)(0.21/0.12)age and menopausal status
Patel, A. V.2005USAwhite, African-American, Hispanic, Asian, other/unknownpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqman970 (485)NCmatched pairs, body mass index, age at menopause, age at menarche, alcohol intake, education, parity, age at first live birth, physical activity, history of breast cysts, family history of breast cancer in mother or sister, use of hormone replacement therapy, and smoking status
Shen, J.2005USAWhite or non-Whitepopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization method2177 (1067)NCage at menarche, parity, lactation, months of lactation, age at first birth, number of miscarriages, history of fertility problems, body mass index at reference, body mass index at age 20, first-degree family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, menopausal status, oral contraceptive use, hormone replacement use, race, education, religion, and marital status
Brewster, A. M.2006USAMostly Caucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedpatented fluorogenic method for nucleic acid analysis(Taqman or 5’nuclease assay) and PCR-RFLP615 (305)(0.06/0.06)family history
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAAfrican Americanspopulation basedPopulation basedthe ABI 7700 sequence detection system or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay1456 (774)(0.07/0.07)offsets and age
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAWhitespopulation basedpopulation basedthe ABI 7700 sequence detection system or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay2407 (1281)(0.06/0.07)offsets and age
Thyagarajan, B.2006USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP, PCR-INVADER, or Sequenom626 (309)(0.07/0.06)age, family history of breast cancer among first degree relatives, physical activity, body mass index
Zhang, Y.2006USACaucasianPopulation basedpopulation basedTaqMan2833 (1580)(0.06/0.07)age and study site
Silva, S. N.2007PortugalCaucasian Portuguesehospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP693 (240)(0.08/0.06)age at diagnosis; alcohol consumption and smoking habits
Loizidou, M. A.2008GreeceGreek Cypriotspopulation basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP2261 (1097)( 0.08/0.08)-
Mitra, A. K.2008IndiaCaucasians of Indo-Europeanhospital basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP376 (151)(0.06/0.14)-
Sangrajrang, S.2008ThailandNShospital basedhospital basedrapid capillary PCR followed by melting curve analysis using fluorescence labeled hybridization probes in a light cycler931 (506)(0.30/0.31)age, body mass index, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer, reproduction parameters, use of contraceptives, menopausal status, hazardous lifestyle, and education
Smith, T. R.2008USACaucasianhospital basedHospital basedmass ARRAY system735 (324)(0.07/0.05)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Smith, T. R.2008USAAfrican-Americanhospital basedhospital basedmass ARRAY system128(53)(0.06/0.06)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Sobczuk, A.2009PolandNSNSNSPCR-RFLP256 (150)(0.53/0.57)-
Ming-Shiean, H.2010TaiwanNShospital basedhospital basedreal-time PCR with the TaqMan assay system934 (401)(0.32/0.28)age, age at first full-term pregnancy, cigarette smoking, body mass index, and family history
Sterpone, S. 2010ItalyCaucasianhospital basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP74 (43)(0.08/0.04)-
Zipprich, J.2010USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization method559 (254)NCmenopause and age and age at menarche
Liu, L.2011ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP1999 (995)(0.30/0.27)age
Al Mutairi, F. M.2013Saudi ArabiaNShospital basedhospital basedTaqMan SNP genotype analysis technique200(100)(0.08/0.02)-
Przybylowska-Sygut, K.2013PolandNShospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP390 (185)(0.14/0.08)-
Ding, P.2014ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedhospital basedpolymerase chain reaction-ligase detection reaction (PCR-LDR)1239 (606)(0.32/0.32)age
McCullough, L. E.2014USAWhite and blackpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization (FP) method1166 (598)NCage
Ramadan, R. A.2014EgyptNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP175(100)(0.40/0.20)age, body mass index , parity, menopausal status, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer, smoking, or physical activity
Smolarz, B.2014PolandNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP140 (70)(0.49/0.50)-
Macias-Gomez, N. M.2015MexicoNShospital basedNSPCR-RFLP697 (345)(0.16/0.15)-

a Definitions: Date, year of publication; NS, not state; NC, not calculable; USA, United State of America.

b Confounders in multivariate analysis.

Appendix A7. Characteristics of Literature Included in the Systematic Review Evaluating the Association Between XRCC1 Arg280His Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a
First AuthorDateCountryEthnicityStudy DesignControl SourceGenotyping MethodsAnalyzed Sample Size (Case Number)Minor Allele Frequency (Case/Control)Considered Confounders b
Moullan, N.2003FranceNShospital basedpopulation basedTaqMan technology or variant specific restriction enzyme digestion566 (254)(0.08/0.04)age
Chacko, P.2005IndiaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP and DNA sequencing techniques246 (123)(0.11/0.14)age and menopausal status
Metsola, K.2005FinlandCaucasianhospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP959 (480)(0.08/0.07)age, age at menarche, age at first full term pregnancy, number of pregnancies, history of benign breast disease, first degree family history of breast cancer, waist-to-hip ratio, smoking and use of alcohol
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAAfrican Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedthe ABI 7700 sequence detection system or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay1446 (765)(0.04/0.03)offsets and age
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAWhitespopulation basedpopulation basedthe ABI 7700 sequence detection system or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay2400 (1271)(0.05/0.04)offsets and age
Zhang, Y.2006USACaucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqMan2802 (1564)(0.05/0.04)age and study site
Loizidou, M. A.2008GreeceGreek Cypriotspopulation basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP2277 (1109)( 0.08/0.09)-
Sangrajrang, S.2008ThailandNShospital basedhospital basedrapid capillary PCR followed by melting curve analysis using fluorescence labeled hybridization probes in a light cycler932 (507)(0.08/0.07)age, body mass index, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer, reproduction parameters, use of contraceptives, menopausal status, hazardous lifestyle, and education
Smith, T. R.2008USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedmass ARRAY system732 (324)(0.04/0.05)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Smith, T. R.2008USAAfrican-Americanhospital basedhospital basedmass ARRAY system128 (53)(0.03/0.04)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Zipprich, J.2010USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization method599 (271)NCmenopause and age and age at menarche
Liu, L.2011ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP1999 (995)(0.09/0.10)age

a Definitions: Date, year of publication; NS, not state; NC, not calculable; USA, United State of America.

b Confounders in multivariate analysis.

Appendix A8. Characteristics of Literature Included in the Systematic Review Evaluating the Association Between XRCC1 Arg399Gln Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a
First AuthorDateCountryEthnicityStudy DesignControl SourceGenotyping MethodsAnalyzed Sample Size (Case Number)Minor Allele Frequency (Case/Control)Considered Confounders b
Duell, E. J.2001USAAfrican-Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedmultiplex PCR-RFLP and 59-exoncuclease (Taqman)519(253)(0.19/0.14)age
Duell, E. J.2001USAWhitespopulation basedpopulation basedmultiplex PCR-RFLP and 59-exoncuclease (Taqman)767(386)(0.35/0.36)AGE
Kim, S. U.2002KoreaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP410(205)(0.35/0.31)breast feeding, family history of breast cancer and menopausal status at baseline
Han, J.2003USACaucasian, Southern European, Scandinavian, Asians, Hispanics, and African Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedpyrosequencing, RFLP, and the 5 nuclease assay (TaqMan)2323(986)(0.37/0.36)age; menopausal status; postmenopausal hormone use; date of blood draw; time of blood draw; fasting status, body mass index at age 18 years, weight gain since age 18 years, age at menarche, age at menopause, parity/age at first birth, first-degree family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, alcohol intake, during smoking, and duration of postmenopausal hormone use
Moullan, N.2003FranceNShospital basedpopulation basedTaqMan technology or variant specific restriction enzyme digestion566(254)(0.34/0.35)age
Shu, X. O.2003ChinaHan Chinesepopulation basedpopulation basedPCR-based RFLP2270(1088)(0.28/0.27)age, education, family history of breast cancer, menopausal status, age at menarche, age at menopause, body mass index, waist: hip ratio, and physical activity
Smith, T. R. 2003USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP518(251)(0.36/0.33)age, family history, age at menarche, age at first live birth, and body mass index
Smith, T. R. 2003USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP462(162)(0.34/0.35)age
Deligezer, U.2004TurkeyNSNSNSmultiplex PCR284(151)(0.39/0.37)-
Figueiredo, J. C.2004CanadaCaucasian-Native or Caucasian-Asian or Caucasian-Blackpopulation basedpopulation basedmatrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry804(402)(0.35/0.37)ethnicity, age, and family history of breast cancer
Forsti, A.2004FinlandNSNSpopulation basedPCR-RFLP521(223)(0.32/0.32)-
Huang, C. S.2004TaiwanNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP368(136)(0.27/0.23)-
Chacko, P.2005IndiaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP and DNA sequencing techniques246 (123)(0.34/0.21)age and menopausal status
Dufloth, R. M.2005BrazilNShospital basedvolunteers (among hospital personnel)PCR-RFLP205(86)(0.27/0.29)-
Metsola, K.2005FinlandCaucasianhospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP957(479)(0.30/0.27)age, age at menarche, age at first full term pregnancy, number of pregnancies, history of benign breast disease, first degree family history of breast cancer, waist-to-hip ratio, smoking and use of alcohol.
Patel, A. V.2005USAWhite, African-American, Hispanic, Asian, other/unknownpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqman904(452)(0.35/0.34)matched pairs, body mass index, age at menopause, age at menarche, alcohol intake, education, parity, age at first live birth, physical activity, history of breast cysts, family history of breast cancer in mother or sister, use of hormone replacement therapy, and smoking status
Shen, J.2005USAWhite or non-Whitepopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization method2177(1067)( 0.36/0.35)age at menarche, parity, lactation, months of lactation, age at first birth, number of miscarriages, history of fertility problems, body mass index at reference, body mass index at age 20, first-degree family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, menopausal status, oral contraceptive use, hormone replacement use, race, education, religion, and marital status
Brewster, A. M.2006USAmostly Caucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedpatented fluorogenic method for nucleic acid analysis(Taqman or 5’nuclease assay) and PCR-RFLP615(305)(0.38/0.37)family history
Bu, D.2006USACaucasian, Black, Hispanic, Ashkenazi Jewishhospital basedhospital basedmultiplex primer extension PCR285(190)(0.34/0.33)-
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAAfrican Americanspopulation basedpopulation basedthe ABI 7700 Sequence Detection System or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay1437(761)(0.16/0.14)offsets and age
Pachkowski, B. F.2006USAWhitespopulation basedpopulation basedthe ABI 7700 sequence detection system or ‘‘Taqman’’ assay2366(1244)(0.36/0.35)offsets and age
Thyagarajan, B.2006USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP, PCR-invader, or Sequenom515(193)(0.50/0.36)age, family history of breast cancer among first degree relatives, physical activity, body mass index
Zhai, X.2006ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP941(302)( 0.25/0.26)age, age at menarche and menopausal
status
Zhang, Y.2006USACaucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqMan5626(3039)(0.36/0.36)age and study site
Zhang, Y.2006PolandCaucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqMan4275(1985)(0.37/0.35)age and study site
Costa, S.2007PortugalNShospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP917(256)(0.34/0.39)age
Silva, S. N.2007PortugalCaucasian Portuguesehospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP697(241)(0.31/0.34)age at diagnosis; alcohol consumption and smoking habits
Ali, M. F.2008USANShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP88(40)(0.52/0.53)-
Kipikasova, L.2008SlovakiaCaucasianhospital basedvolunteersPCR with confronting two pair primers (PCR-CTPP)227(114)(0.35/0.34)-
Loizidou, M. A.2008GreeceGreek Cypriotspopulation basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP2283(1107)( 0.32/0.33)-
Mitra, A. K.2008IndiaCaucasians of Indo-Europeanshospital basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP375(150)(0.39/0.53)-
Saadat, M.2008IranPersian Muslimshospital basedNSPCR-RFLP373(186)(0.36/0.32)family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives and cigarette smoking
Sangrajrang, S.2008ThailandNShospital basedhospital basedrapid capillary PCR followed by melting curve analysis using fluorescence labeled hybridization probes in a Light Cycler931(507)(0.27/0.23)age, body mass index, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer, reproduction parameters, use of contraceptives, menopausal status, hazardous lifestyle, and education
Smith, T. R.2008USACaucasianhospital basedhospital basedmass ARRAY system718(312)(0.34/0.33)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Smith, T. R.2008USAAfrican-Americanhospital basedhospital basedmass ARRAY system126(52)(0.14/0.11)age, family history of breast cancer, smoking history, age at menarche, age at first live birth and body mass index
Sobczuk, A.2009PolandNSNSNSPCR-RFLP256(150)(0.55/0.57)-
Syamala, V. S.2009IndiaNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP726(359)(0.37/0.30)age
Jakubowska, A.2010PolandNSNSNSPCR-based fragment analyses using the CEQTM 8000 Genetic DNA Analysis System and/or ethidium bromide-stained agarose gels607(317)(0.35/0.39)index, year of birth and BRCA1 mutation
Jelonek, K.2010PolandCaucasianhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP645(94)(0.35/0.37)-
Ming-Shiean, H.2010TaiwanNShospital basedhospital basedreal-time PCR with the TaqMan assay system926(395)(0.31/0.29)age, age at first full-term pregnancy, cigarette smoking, body mass index, and family history
Romanowicz, H.2010PolandNShospital basedNSPCR-RFLP440(220)(0.44/0.34)-
Santos, R. A.2010BrazilNSNSvolunteersPCR-RFLP150(65)(0.33/0.40)-
Sterpone, S. 2010ItalyCaucasianhospital basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP74(43)(0.53/0.32)-
Zipprich, J.2010USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization method555(254)(0.30/0.34)menopause and age and age at menarche
Liu, L.2011ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP1999(995)(0.26/0.28)age
Roberts, M. R.2011USANShospital basedpopulation basedmatrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flightmass spectrometry2752(982)(0.34/0.32)age, education, race, smoking status, age at first birth, family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, age at menarche and hormone therapy use
Hussien, Y. M.2012EgyptNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-CTPP method200(100)(0.37/0.30)age
Al Mutairi, F. M.2013Saudi ArabiaNShospital basedhospital basedTaqMan SNP genotype analysis technique200(100)(0.26/0.25)-
Przybylowska-Sygut, K.2013PolandNShospital basedpopulation basedPCR-RFLP390(185)(0.36/0.37)-
Sapkota, Y.2013CanadaCaucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedsequenom iPLEX Gold platform7225(2720)NCbody mass index
Ding, p.2014ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedhospital basedpolymerase chain reaction-ligase detection reaction (PCR-LDR)1239(606)(0.30/0.25)Age
Luo, H.2014ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedhospital basedPCR-CTPP439(194)(0.34/0.25)age, age at menarche, pregnancy, menopausal status, body mass index, and family history of cancer
McCullough, L. E.2014USAWhite and Blackpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization (FP) method1163(597)NCage
Ramadan, R. A.2014EgyptNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP175(100)(0.44/0.29)age, body mass index, parity, menopausal status, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer,
smoking, or physical activity
Shadrina, A. S2014RussiaCaucasianNShospital basedreal-time PCR allelic discrimination with TaqMan probes1222(658)(0.36/0.31)age
Macias-Gomez, N. M.2015MexicoNShospital basedNSPCR-RFLP686(345)(0.29/0.23)-

a Definitions: Date, year of publication; NS, not state; NC, not calculable; USA, United State of America.

b Confounders in multivariate analysis.

Appendix A9. Characteristics of Literature Included in the Systematic Review Evaluating the Association Between OGG1 Ser326Cys Polymorphism and Breast Cancer a
First AuthorDateCountryEthnicityStudy DesignControl SourceGenotyping MethodsAnalyzed Sample Size (Case Number)Minor Allele Frequency (Case/Control)Considered Confounders b
Choi, J. Y.2003KoreaKoreanhospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP549 (265)(0.56/0.55)age, body mass index, family history of breast cancer, and parity factor
Choi, J. Y.2003JapanJapanesehospital basedhospital basedPCR-CTPP389 (201)(0.48/0.42)age, body mass index , family history of breast cancer, and parity factor
Vogel, U.2003DenmarkNSpopulation basedpopulation basedreal-time PCR869 (425)(0.22/0.24)-
Huang, C. S.2004TaiwanNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP368 (136)(0.58/0.60)-
Cai, Q.2006ChinaHan Chinesepopulation basedpopulation basedfluorogenic 5´ nuclease assay with primers2269 (1102)(0.58/0.58)AGE, education level, menopausal status, and age at first live birth
Rossner, P., Jr.2006USANSpopulation basedpopulation basedtemplate-directed dye-terminator incorporation assay with fluorescence polarization detection2134 (1041)(0.22/0.22)AGE and simultaneously adjusted for three SNPs
Zhang, Y.2006USACaucasianpopulation basedpopulation basedTaqMan2815 (1571)(0.21/0.21)age and study site
Romanowicz-Makowska, H.2008PolandNSNSNSPCR-RFLP206 (100)(0.51/0.57)-
Sangrajrang, S.2008ThailandNShospital basedhospital basedrapid capillary PCR followed by melting curve analysis using fluorescence labeled hybridization probes in a Light Cycler930 (506)(0.55/0.50)age, body mass index, age at menarche, family history of breast cancer, reproduction parameters, use of contraceptives, menopausal status, hazardous lifestyle, and education
Synowiec, E.2008PolandNShospital basedNSPCR-RFLP89 (41)(0.52/0.68)age
Ming-Shiean, H.2010TaiwanNShospital basedhospital basedreal-time PCR with the TaqMan assay system934 (401)(0.63/0.62)age, age at first full-term pregnancy, cigarette smoking, body mass index, and family history
Sterpone, S. 2010ItalyCaucasianhospital basedvolunteersPCR-RFLP74 (43)(0.31/0.29)-
Roberts, M. R.2011USANShospital basedpopulation basedmatrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flightmass spectrometry2941 (1054)(0.22/0.22)age, education, race, smoking status, age at first birth, family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease, age at menarche and hormone therapy use
Kim, K. Y.2013KoreaNShospital basedpopulation basedIllumina GoldenGate™method707 (346)(0.47/0.49)age, family history and body mass index
Xie, H.2013ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedhospital basedPCR and high-resolution melting and sequencing1407 (630)(0.60/0.56)-
Luo, H.2014ChinaHan Chinesehospital basedhospital basedPCR-CTPP439 (194)(0.55/0.59)age, age at menarche, pregnancy, menopausal status, body mass index, and family history of cancer
McCullough, L. E.2014USAWhite and blackpopulation basedpopulation basedfluorescence polarization (FP) method1135(580)NCage
Rodrigues, P.2014SpainCaucasianhospital basedhospital basedSNPlex technology (based on oligation assay/polymerase chain reaction and capillary electrophoresis)2123(711)(-/0.21)age
Smolarz, B.2014PolandNShospital basedhospital basedPCR-RFLP140 (70)(0.49/0.50)-

b Confounders in multivariate analysis.

Acknowledgements

Footnotes

References

  • 1.

    Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014; 64(1) : 9 -29 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 2.

    Sapkota Y. Germline DNA variations in breast cancer predisposition and prognosis: a systematic review of the literature. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2014; 144(2) : 77 -91 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 3.

    Pharoah PD, Antoniou A, Bobrow M, Zimmern RL, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Polygenic susceptibility to breast cancer and implications for prevention. Nat Genet. 2002; 31(1) : 33 -6 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 4.

    Walsh T, King MC. Ten genes for inherited breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2007; 11(2) : 103 -5 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 5.

    Pharoah PD, Dunning AM, Ponder BA, Easton DF. Association studies for finding cancer-susceptibility genetic variants. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004; 4(11) : 850 -60 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 6.

    Lalloo F, Evans DG. Familial breast cancer. Clin Genet. 2012; 82(2) : 105 -14 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 7.

    Goode EL, Ulrich CM, Potter JD. Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol., Biomarkers Prev. 2002; 11(12) : 1513 -30

  • 8.

    Zharkov DO. Base excision DNA repair. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2008; 65(10) : 1544 -65 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 9.

    Popanda O, Schattenberg T, Phong CT, Butkiewicz D, Risch A, Edler L, et al. Specific combinations of DNA repair gene variants and increased risk for non-small cell lung cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2004; 25(12) : 2433 -41 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 10.

    Abdel-Rahman SZ, Soliman AS, Bondy ML, Omar S, El-Badawy SA, Khaled HM, et al. Inheritance of the 194Trp and the 399Gln variant alleles of the DNA repair gene XRCC1 are associated with increased risk of early-onset colorectal carcinoma in Egypt. Cancer Lett. 2000; 159(1) : 79 -86 [PubMed]

  • 11.

    Li S, Peng Q, Chen Y, You J, Chen Z, Deng Y, et al. DNA repair gene XRCC1 polymorphisms, smoking, and bladder cancer risk: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013; 8(9)[DOI][PubMed]

  • 12.

    Xie H, Xia K, Rong H, Chen X. Genetic polymorphism in hOGG1 is associated with triple-negative breast cancer risk in Chinese Han women. Breast. 2013; 22(5) : 707 -12 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 13.

    Hung RJ, Brennan P, Canzian F, Szeszenia-Dabrowska N, Zaridze D, Lissowska J, et al. Large-scale investigation of base excision repair genetic polymorphisms and lung cancer risk in a multicenter study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97(8) : 567 -76 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 14.

    Yuan W, Xu L, Feng Y, Yang Y, Chen W, Wang J, et al. The hOGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010; 122(3) : 835 -42 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 15.

    Masson M, Niedergang C, Schreiber V, Muller S, Menissier-de Murcia J, de Murcia G. XRCC1 is specifically associated with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and negatively regulates its activity following DNA damage. Mol Cell Biol. 1998; 18(6) : 3563 -71 [PubMed]

  • 16.

    Nash RA, Caldecott KW, Barnes DE, Lindahl T. XRCC1 protein interacts with one of two distinct forms of DNA ligase III. Biochemistry. 1997; 36(17) : 5207 -11 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 17.

    Janssen K, Schlink K, Gotte W, Hippler B, Kaina B, Oesch F. DNA repair activity of 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase 1 (OGG1) in human lymphocytes is not dependent on genetic polymorphism Ser326/Cys326. Mutat Res. 2001; 486(3) : 207 -16 [PubMed]

  • 18.

    Kohno T, Shinmura K, Tosaka M, Tani M, Kim SR, Sugimura H, et al. Genetic polymorphisms and alternative splicing of the hOGG1 gene, that is involved in the repair of 8-hydroxyguanine in damaged DNA. Oncogene. 1998; 16(25) : 3219 -25 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 19.

    Hu Z, Ma H, Chen F, Wei Q, Shen H. XRCC1 polymorphisms and cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 38 case-control studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005; 14(7) : 1810 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 20.

    Kiyohara C, Takayama K, Nakanishi Y. Association of genetic polymorphisms in the base excision repair pathway with lung cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Lung Cancer. 2006; 54(3) : 267 -83 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 21.

    Silva SN, Moita R, Azevedo AP, Gouveia R, Manita I, Pina JE, et al. Menopausal age and XRCC1 gene polymorphisms: role in breast cancer risk. Cancer Detect Prev. 2007; 31(4) : 303 -9 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 22.

    Smith TR, Miller MS, Lohman K, Lange EM, Case LD, Mohrenweiser HW, et al. Polymorphisms of XRCC1 and XRCC3 genes and susceptibility to breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 2003; 190(2) : 183 -90 [PubMed]

  • 23.

    Thyagarajan B, Anderson KE, Folsom AR, Jacobs DJ, Lynch CF, Bargaje A, et al. No association between XRCC1 and XRCC3 gene polymorphisms and breast cancer risk: Iowa Women's Health Study. Cancer Detect Prev. 2006; 30(4) : 313 -21 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 24.

    Yin J, Wang C, Liang D, Vogel U, Yue L, Liu J, et al. No evidence of association between the synonymous polymorphisms in XRCC1 and ERCC2 and breast cancer susceptibility among nonsmoking Chinese. Gene. 2012; 503(1) : 118 -22 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 25.

    Cai Q, Shu XO, Wen W, Courtney R, Dai Q, Gao YT, et al. Functional Ser326Cys polymorphism in the hOGG1 gene is not associated with breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006; 15(2) : 403 -4 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 26.

    Vogel U, Nexo BA, Olsen A, Thomsen B, Jacobsen NR, Wallin H, et al. No association between OGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003; 12(2) : 170 -1 [PubMed]

  • 27.

    Zhang Y, Newcomb PA, Egan KM, Titus-Ernstoff L, Chanock S, Welch R, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in base-excision repair pathway genes and risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006; 15(2) : 353 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 28.

    Chacko P, Rajan B, Joseph T, Mathew BS, Pillai MR. Polymorphisms in DNA repair gene XRCC1 and increased genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005; 89(1) : 15 -21 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 29.

    Sangrajrang S, Schmezer P, Burkholder I, Waas P, Boffetta P, Brennan P, et al. Polymorphisms in three base excision repair genes and breast cancer risk in Thai women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 111(2) : 279 -88 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 30.

    Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000; 283(15) : 2008 -12 [PubMed]

  • 31.

    da Costa BR, Hilfiker R, Egger M. PEDro's bias: summary quality scores should not be used in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(1) : 75 -7 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 32.

    da Costa BR, Juni P. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials: principles and pitfalls. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(47) : 3336 -45 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 33.

    Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999; 282(11) : 1054 -60 [PubMed]

  • 34.

    Renehan AG, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller RF, Zwahlen M. Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet. 2008; 371(9612) : 569 -78 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 35.

    Romanowicz-Makowska H, Smolarz B, Kulig A. [Polymorphisms in XRCC1 and ERCC4/XPF DNA repair genes and associations with breast cancer risk in women]. Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2007; 22(129) : 200 -3 [PubMed]

  • 36.

    Sterpone S, Cornetta T, Padua L, Mastellone V, Giammarino D, Testa A, et al. DNA repair capacity and acute radiotherapy adverse effects in Italian breast cancer patients. Mutat Res. 2010; 684(1-2) : 43 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 37.

    Sobczuk A, Romanowicz-Makowska H, Fiks T, Baszczynski J, Smolarz B. XRCC1 and XRCC3 DNA repair gene polymorphisms in breast cancer women from the Lodz region of Poland. Pol J Pathol. 2009; 60(2) : 76 -80 [PubMed]

  • 38.

    Sterpone S, Mastellone V, Padua L, Novelli F, Patrono C, Cornetta T, et al. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms in BER and HRR genes, XRCC1 haplotypes and breast cancer risk in Caucasian women. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2010; 136(4) : 631 -6 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 39.

    Al Mutairi FM, Alanazi M, Shalaby M, Alabdulkarim HA, Pathan AA, Parine NR. Association of XRCC1 gene polymorphisms with breast cancer susceptibility in Saudi patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013; 14(6) : 3809 -13 [PubMed]

  • 40.

    Ali MF, Meza JL, Rogan EG, Chakravarti D. Prevalence of BER gene polymorphisms in sporadic breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2008; 19(4) : 1033 -8 [PubMed]

  • 41.

    Brewster AM, Jorgensen TJ, Ruczinski I, Huang HY, Hoffman S, Thuita L, et al. Polymorphisms of the DNA repair genes XPD (Lys751Gln) and XRCC1 (Arg399Gln and Arg194Trp): relationship to breast cancer risk and familial predisposition to breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006; 95(1) : 73 -80 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 42.

    Bu D, Tomlinson G, Lewis CM, Zhang C, Kildebeck E, Euhus DM. An intronic polymorphism associated with increased XRCC1 expression, reduced apoptosis and familial breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006; 99(3) : 257 -65 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 43.

    Choi JY, Hamajima N, Tajima K, Yoo KY, Yoon KS, Park SK, et al. hOGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism and breast cancer risk among Asian women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003; 79(1) : 59 -62 [PubMed]

  • 44.

    Costa S, Pinto D, Pereira D, Rodrigues H, Cameselle-Teijeiro J, Medeiros R, et al. DNA repair polymorphisms might contribute differentially on familial and sporadic breast cancer susceptibility: a study on a Portuguese population. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007; 103(2) : 209 -17 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 45.

    Deligezer U, Dalay N. Association of the XRCC1 gene polymorphisms with cancer risk in Turkish breast cancer patients. Exp Mol Med. 2004; 36(6) : 572 -5 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 46.

    Ding P, Yang Y, Cheng L, Zhang X, Cheng L, Li C, et al. The relationship between seven common polymorphisms from five DNA repair genes and the risk for breast cancer in northern Chinese women. PLoS One. 2014; 9(3)[DOI][PubMed]

  • 47.

    Duell EJ, Millikan RC, Pittman GS, Winkel S, Lunn RM, Tse CK, et al. Polymorphisms in the DNA repair gene XRCC1 and breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2001; 10(3) : 217 -22 [PubMed]

  • 48.

    Dufloth RM, Costa S, Schmitt F, Zeferino LC. DNA repair gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to familial breast cancer in a group of patients from Campinas, Brazil. Genet Mol Res. 2005; 4(4) : 771 -82 [PubMed]

  • 49.

    Figueiredo JC, Knight JA, Briollais L, Andrulis IL, Ozcelik H. Polymorphisms XRCC1-R399Q and XRCC3-T241M and the risk of breast cancer at the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004; 13(4) : 583 -91 [PubMed]

  • 50.

    Forsti A, Angelini S, Festa F, Sanyal S, Zhang Z, Grzybowska E, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2004; 11(4) : 917 -22 [PubMed]

  • 51.

    Han J, Hankinson SE, De Vivo I, Spiegelman D, Tamimi RM, Mohrenweiser HW, et al. A prospective study of XRCC1 haplotypes and their interaction with plasma carotenoids on breast cancer risk. Cancer Res. 2003; 63(23) : 8536 -41 [PubMed]

  • 52.

    Huang CS, Chen JJ, Yang SY, Cheng CW, Chern HD, Chang KJ, et al. Breast Cancer Risk Associated with Genotypic Polymorphism of Oxidative DNA Damage Repair Genes-A Multigenic Study of Base Excision Repair and Transcription-Coupled Repair in Cancer Susceptibility. J Genet Mole Biol. 2004; 15 : 116 -36

  • 53.

    Hussien YM, Gharib AF, Awad HA, Karam RA, Elsawy WH. Impact of DNA repair genes polymorphism (XPD and XRCC1) on the risk of breast cancer in Egyptian female patients. Mol Biol Rep. 2012; 39(2) : 1895 -901 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 54.

    Jakubowska A, Gronwald J, Menkiszak J, Gorski B, Huzarski T, Byrski T, et al. BRCA1-associated breast and ovarian cancer risks in Poland: no association with commonly studied polymorphisms. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010; 119(1) : 201 -11 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 55.

    Jelonek K, Gdowicz-Klosok A, Pietrowska M, Borkowska M, Korfanty J, Rzeszowska-Wolny J, et al. Association between single-nucleotide polymorphisms of selected genes involved in the response to DNA damage and risk of colon, head and neck, and breast cancers in a Polish population. J Appl Genet. 2010; 51(3) : 343 -52 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 56.

    Kim KY, Han W, Noh DY, Kang D, Kwack K. Impact of genetic polymorphisms in base excision repair genes on the risk of breast cancer in a Korean population. Gene. 2013; 532(2) : 192 -6 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 57.

    Kim SU, Park SK, Yoo KY, Yoon KS, Choi JY, Seo JS, et al. XRCC1 genetic polymorphism and breast cancer risk. Pharmacogenetics. 2002; 12(4) : 335 -8 [PubMed]

  • 58.

    Kipikasova L, Wolaschka T, Bohus P, Baumohlova H, Bober J, Blazejova J, et al. Polymorphisms of the XRCC1 and XPD genes and breast cancer risk: a case-control study. Pathol Oncol Res. 2008; 14(2) : 131 -5 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 59.

    Liu L, Yuan P, Liu L, Wu C, Zhang X, Guo H, et al. A functional -77T>C polymorphism in XRCC1 is associated with risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011; 125(2) : 479 -87 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 60.

    Loizidou MA, Michael T, Neuhausen SL, Newbold RF, Marcou Y, Kakouri E, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in the DNA repair genes XRCC1, XRCC2 and XRCC3 and risk of breast cancer in Cyprus. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 112(3) : 575 -9 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 61.

    Luo H, Li Z, Qing Y, Zhang SH, Peng Y, Li Q, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphisms of DNA base-excision repair genes (APE1, OGG1 and XRCC1) associated with breast cancer risk in a Chinese population. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014; 15(3) : 1133 -40 [PubMed]

  • 62.

    Macias-Gomez NM, Peralta-Leal V, Meza-Espinoza JP, Gutierrez-Angulo M, Duran-Gonzalez J, Ramirez-Gonzalez JM, et al. Polymorphisms of the XRCC1 gene and breast cancer risk in the Mexican population. Fam Cancer. 2015; 14(3) : 349 -54 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 63.

    McCullough LE, Santella RM, Cleveland RJ, Millikan RC, Olshan AF, North KE, et al. Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes, recreational physical activity and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer. 2014; 134(3) : 654 -63 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 64.

    Metsola K, Kataja V, Sillanpaa P, Siivola P, Heikinheimo L, Eskelinen M, et al. XRCC1 and XPD genetic polymorphisms, smoking and breast cancer risk in a Finnish case-control study. Breast Cancer Res. 2005; 7(6) -97 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 65.

    Ming-Shiean H, Yu JC, Wang HW, Chen ST, Hsiung CN, Ding SL, et al. Synergistic effects of polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and endogenous estrogen exposure on female breast cancer risk. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 17(3) : 760 -71 [PubMed]

  • 66.

    Mitra AK, Singh N, Singh A, Garg VK, Agarwal A, Sharma M, et al. Association of polymorphisms in base excision repair genes with the risk of breast cancer: a case-control study in North Indian women. Oncol Res. 2008; 17(3) : 127 -35 [PubMed]

  • 67.

    Moullan N, Cox DG, Angele S, Romestaing P, Gerard JP, Hall J. Polymorphisms in the DNA repair gene XRCC1, breast cancer risk, and response to radiotherapy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003; 12(11 Pt 1) : 1168 -74 [PubMed]

  • 68.

    Pachkowski BF, Winkel S, Kubota Y, Swenberg JA, Millikan RC, Nakamura J. XRCC1 genotype and breast cancer: functional studies and epidemiologic data show interactions between XRCC1 codon 280 His and smoking. Cancer Res. 2006; 66(5) : 2860 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 69.

    Patel AV, Calle EE, Pavluck AL, Feigelson HS, Thun MJ, Rodriguez C. A prospective study of XRCC1 (X-ray cross-complementing group 1) polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res. 2005; 7(6) -73 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 70.

    Przybylowska-Sygut K, Stanczyk M, Kusinska R, Kordek R, Majsterek I. Association of the Arg194Trp and the Arg399Gln polymorphisms of the XRCC1 gene with risk occurrence and the response to adjuvant therapy among Polish women with breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2013; 13(1) : 61 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 71.

    Ramadan RA, Desouky LM, Elnaggar MA, Moaaz M, Elsherif AM. Association of DNA repair genes XRCC1 (Arg399Gln), (Arg194Trp) and XRCC3 (Thr241Met) polymorphisms with the risk of breast cancer: a case-control study in Egypt. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2014; 18(11) : 754 -60 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 72.

    Roberts MR, Shields PG, Ambrosone CB, Nie J, Marian C, Krishnan SS, et al. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and association with breast cancer risk in the web study. Carcinogenesis. 2011; 32(8) : 1223 -30 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 73.

    Rodrigues P, de Marco G, Furriol J, Mansego ML, Pineda-Alonso M, Gonzalez-Neira A, et al. Oxidative stress in susceptibility to breast cancer: study in Spanish population. BMC Cancer. 2014; 14 : 861 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 74.

    Romanowicz H, Smolarz B, Baszczynski J, Zadrozny M, Kulig A. Genetics polymorphism in DNA repair genes by base excision repair pathway (XRCC1) and homologous recombination (XRCC2 and RAD51) and the risk of breast carcinoma in the Polish population. Pol J Pathol. 2010; 61(4) : 206 -12 [PubMed]

  • 75.

    Romanowicz-Makowska H, Smolarz B, Makowski M, Polac I, Pertynski T. Ser326Cys polymorphism in DNA repair genes hOGG1 in breast cancer women. Pol J Pathol. 2008; 59(4) : 201 -4 [PubMed]

  • 76.

    Rossner PJ, Terry MB, Gammon MD, Zhang FF, Teitelbaum SL, Eng SM, et al. OGG1 polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006; 15(4) : 811 -5 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 77.

    Saadat M, Kohan L, Omidvari S. Genetic polymorphisms of XRCC1 (codon 399) and susceptibility to breast cancer in Iranian women, a case-control study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 111(3) : 549 -53 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 78.

    Santos RA, Teixeira AC, Mayorano MB, Carrara HH, Andrade JM, Takahashi CS. DNA repair genes XRCC1 and XRCC3 polymorphisms and their relationship with the level of micronuclei in breast cancer patients. Genet Mol Biol. 2010; 33(4) : 637 -40 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 79.

    Sapkota Y, Mackey JR, Lai R, Franco-Villalobos C, Lupichuk S, Robson PJ, et al. Assessing SNP-SNP interactions among DNA repair, modification and metabolism related pathway genes in breast cancer susceptibility. PLoS One. 2014; 8(6)[DOI][PubMed]

  • 80.

    Shadrina AS, Ermolenko NA, Boyarskikh UA, Sinkina TV, Lazarev AF, Petrova VD, et al. Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and breast cancer risk in Russian population: a case-control study. Clin Exp Med. 2014; [DOI][PubMed]

  • 81.

    Shen J, Gammon MD, Terry MB, Wang L, Wang Q, Zhang F, et al. Polymorphisms in XRCC1 modify the association between polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-DNA adducts, cigarette smoking, dietary antioxidants, and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005; 14(2) : 336 -42 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 82.

    Shu XO, Cai Q, Gao YT, Wen W, Jin F, Zheng W. A population-based case-control study of the Arg399Gln polymorphism in DNA repair gene XRCC1 and risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003; 12(12) : 1462 -7 [PubMed]

  • 83.

    Smith TR, Levine EA, Freimanis RI, Akman SA, Allen GO, Hoang KN, et al. Polygenic model of DNA repair genetic polymorphisms in human breast cancer risk. Carcinogenesis. 2008; 29(11) : 2132 -8 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 84.

    Smith TR, Levine EA, Perrier ND, Miller MS, Freimanis RI, Lohman K, et al. DNA-repair genetic polymorphisms and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003; 12(11 Pt 1) : 1200 -4 [PubMed]

  • 85.

    Smolarz B, Makowska M, Samulak D, Michalska MM, Mojs E, Wilczak M, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of ERCC2, hOGG1, and XRCC1 DNA repair genes and the risk of triple-negative breast cancer in Polish women. Tumour Biol. 2014; 35(4) : 3495 -502 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 86.

    Syamala VS, Syamala V, Sreedharan H, Raveendran PB, Kuttan R, Ankathil R. Contribution of XPD (Lys751Gln) and XRCC1 (Arg399Gln) polymorphisms in familial and sporadic breast cancer predisposition and survival: an Indian report. Pathol Oncol Res. 2009; 15(3) : 389 -97 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 87.

    Synowiec E, Stefanska J, Morawiec Z, Blasiak J, Wozniak K. Association between DNA damage, DNA repair genes variability and clinical characteristics in breast cancer patients. Mutat Res. 2008; 648(1-2) : 65 -72 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 88.

    Zhai X, Liu J, Hu Z, Wang S, Qing J, Wang X, et al. Polymorphisms of ADPRT Val762Ala and XRCC1 Arg399Glu and risk of breast cancer in Chinese women: a case control analysis. Oncol Rep. 2006; 15(1) : 247 -52 [PubMed]

  • 89.

    Zipprich J, Terry MB, Brandt-Rauf P, Freyer GA, Liao Y, Agrawal M, et al. XRCC1 polymorphisms and breast cancer risk from the New York Site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry: A family-based case-control study. J Carcinog. 2010; 9 : 4 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 90.

    Sasco AJ, Lowenfels AB, Pasker-de Jong P. Review article: epidemiology of male breast cancer. A meta-analysis of published case-control studies and discussion of selected aetiological factors. Int J Cancer. 1993; 53(4) : 538 -49 [PubMed]

  • 91.

    Okobia MN, Bunker CH. Molecular epidemiology of breast cancer: a review. Afr J Reprod Health. 2003; 7(3) : 17 -28 [PubMed]

  • 92.

    Ledwon JK, Hennig EE, Maryan N, Goryca K, Nowakowska D, Niwinska A, et al. Common low-penetrance risk variants associated with breast cancer in Polish women. BMC Cancer. 2013; 13 : 510 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 93.

    Weber BL, Nathanson KL. Low penetrance genes associated with increased risk for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2000; 36(10) : 1193 -9 [PubMed]

  • 94.

    Apostolou P, Fostira F. Hereditary breast cancer: the era of new susceptibility genes. Biomed Res Int. 2013; 2013 : 747318 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 95.

    Ueda M, Toji E, Nunobiki O, Izuma S, Okamoto Y, Torii K, et al. Germline polymorphism of cancer susceptibility genes in gynecologic cancer. Hum Cell. 2008; 21(4) : 95 -104 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 96.

    Wang K. Testing for genetic association in the presence of population stratification in genome-wide association studies. Genet Epidemiol. 2009; 33(7) : 637 -45 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 97.

    Lewis CM, Knight J. Introduction to genetic association studies. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2012; 2012(3) : 297 -306 [DOI][PubMed]

  • 98.

    Tsao H, Florez JC. Introduction to genetic association studies. J Invest Dermatol. 2007; 127(10) : 2283 -7 [DOI][PubMed]

  • COMMENTS

    LEAVE A COMMENT HERE: