Fiche publication
Date publication
mai 2011
Auteurs
Membres identifiés du Cancéropôle Est :
Pr CORMIER Luc
Tous les auteurs :
Cornu JN, Drouin S, Cancel-Tassin G, Bigot P, Azzouzi AR, Koutlidis N, Cormier L, Gaffory C, Roupret M, Sebe P, Bitker MO, Haab F, Cussenot O
Lien Pubmed
Résumé
Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been associated with prostate cancer (PCa) risk and tumor aggressiveness in retrospective studies. To assess the value of genotyping in a clinical setting, we evaluated the correlation between three genotypes (rs1447295 and rs6983267[8q24] and rs4054823[17p12]) and prostatic biopsy outcome prospectively in a French population of Caucasian men. Five hundred ninety-eight patients with prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) >4 ng/mL or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) participated in this prospective, multicenter study. Age, familial history of PCa, body mass index (BMI), data of DRE, International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) score, PSA value and prostatic volume were collected prospectively before prostatic biopsy. Correlation between genotypes and biopsy outcome (positive or negative) and Gleason score (6) were studied by univariate and multivariable analysis. rs1447295 and rs6983267 risk variants were found to be associated with the presence of PCa in univariate analysis. rs6983267 genotype remained significantly linked to a positive biopsy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-2.59, P = 0.026) in multivariable analysis, but rs1447295 genotype did not (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 0.89-2.43, P = 0.13).When biopsy outcome was stratified according to Gleason score, risk variants of rs1447295 were associated with aggressive disease (Gleason score >/=7) in univariate and multivariable analysis (OR = 2.05 95% CI: 1.10-3.79, P = 0.023). rs6983267 GG genotype was not related to aggressiveness. The results did not reach significance concerning rs4054823 for any analysis. This inaugural prospective evaluation thus confirmed potential usefulness of genotyping PCa assessment. Ongoing clinical evaluation of larger panels of SNPs will detail the actual impact of genetic markers on clinical practice.
Référence
Mol Med. 2011 May-Jun;17(5-6):473-7
