Skip Navigation


American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on September 25, 2006
American Journal of Epidemiology 2006 164(11):1027-1042; doi:10.1093/aje/kwj321
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow An erratum has been published
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
164/11/1027    most recent
kwj321v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (34)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Raimondi, S
Right arrow Articles by Taioli, E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Raimondi, S
Right arrow Articles by Taioli, E
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Copyright © 2006 by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health All rights reserved; printed in U.S.A.

Meta- and Pooled Analysis of GSTT1 and Lung Cancer: A HuGE-GSEC Review

S Raimondi1, V Paracchini1, H Autrup2, JM Barros-Dios3, S Benhamou4, P Boffetta5, ML Cote6, IA Dialyna7, V Dolzan8, R Filiberti9, S Garte10,11, A Hirvonen12, K Husgafvel-Pursiainen12, EN Imyanitov13, I Kalina14, D Kang15, C Kiyohara16, T Kohno17, P Kremers18, Q Lan19, S London20, AC Povey21, A Rannug22, E Reszka23, A Risch24, M Romkes11, J Schneider25, A Seow26, PG Shields27, RC Sobti28, M Sørensen29, M Spinola30, MR Spitz31, RC Strange32, I Stücker33, H Sugimura34, J To-Figueras35, S Tokudome36, P Yang37, J-M Yuan38, M Warholm22 and E Taioli11

1 Policlinico Milano, Milan, Italy
2 Institute of Public Health, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark
3 Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
4 INSERM and Evry University, Evry, France
5 Genetics and Epidemiology Cluster, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
6 Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
7 Department of Virology, University of Crete, Crete, Greece
8 Institute of Biochemistry, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
9 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, National Cancer Research Institute, Genoa, Italy
10 Genetics Research Institute, Milan, Italy
11 Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
12 Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland
13 N. N. Petrov Institute of Oncology, St. Petersburg, Russia
14 Department of Medical Biology, School of Medicine, P. J. Safárik University, Kosice, Slovakia
15 Institute of Environmental Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
16 Department of Preventive Medicine, Kyushu University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Fukuoka, Japan
17 Biology Division, National Cancer Center Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan
18 Service of Medical Chemistry, Institute of Pathology, Sart Tilman Liège, Belgium
19 Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
20 National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC
21 Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
22 Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
23 Department of Toxicology and Carcinogenesis, Institute of Occupational Medicine, Lodz, Poland
24 Department of Toxicology and Cancer Risk Factors, DKFZ-German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
25 Institute of Occupational and Social Medicine, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
26 Department of Community, Occupational and Family Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
27 Cancer Genetics and Epidemiology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC
28 Department of Biotechnology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
29 Danish Cancer Society, Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, Copenhagen, Denmark
30 Department of Experimental Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy
31 Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
32 Centre for Cell and Molecular Medicine, Keele University, North Staffordshire Hospital, Staffordshire, England
33 INSERM Unit of Epidemiologic Statistic Research on the Environment and Health, Villejuif Cedex, France
34 First Department of Pathology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Japan
35 Hospital Clinic Provincial Toxicology Unit, Barcelona, Spain
36 Department of Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Japan
37 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN
38 School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN

Correspondence to Dr. Emanuela Taioli, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Epidemiology, 5150 Centre Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15232 (e-mail: taiolien{at}upmc.edu).

Received for publication July 20, 2005. Accepted for publication April 1, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
Lung cancer is the most common malignancy in the Western world, and the main risk factor is tobacco smoking. Polymorphisms in metabolic genes may modulate the risk associated with environmental factors. The glutathione S-transferase theta 1 gene (GSTT1) is a particularly attractive candidate for lung cancer susceptibility because of its involvement in the metabolism of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons found in tobacco smoke and of other chemicals, pesticides, and industrial solvents. The frequency of the GSTT1 null genotype is lower among Caucasians (10–20%) than among Asians (50–60%). The authors present a meta- and a pooled analysis of case-control, genotype-based studies that examined the association between GSTT1 and lung cancer (34 studies, 7,629 cases and 10,087 controls for the meta-analysis; 34 studies, 7,044 cases and 10,000 controls for the pooled analysis). No association was observed between GSTT1 deletion and lung cancer for Caucasians (odds ratio (OR) = 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87, 1.12); for Asians, a positive association was found (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.49). In the pooled analysis, the odds ratios were not significant for either Asians (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.13) or Caucasians (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.21). No significant interaction was observed between GSTT1 and smoking on lung cancer, whereas GSTT1 appeared to modulate occupational-related lung cancer.

disease susceptibility; epidemiology; genes; genetic predisposition to disease; GSTT1; lung neoplasms; meta-analysis

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; GSEC, Genetic Susceptibility to Environmental Carcinogens; GST, glutathione S-transferase; GSTT1, glutathione S-transferase theta 1 gene; OR, odds ratio


   GENE
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
The glutathione S-transferase (GST) supergene family consists of phase II detoxifying enzymes catalyzing several reduced glutathione-dependent reactions with compounds containing an electrophilic center (1). The GST family comprises at least eight classes of GST isoenzymes: alpha, mu, pi, sigma, theta, kappa, omega, and zeta (2). Genetic polymorphisms have been described in all these classes (3). The soluble GSTs exist as dimeric proteins of approximately 25 kDa; they are highly expressed, constituting up to 4 percent of the total soluble proteins (4).

Two theta-class GSTs, GSTT1 and GSTT2, have been identified in the human liver, and the corresponding genes are localized in the same region on human chromosome 22, specifically in the subband 22q11.2 (5, 6). GSTT1 enzymes show important differences in their catalytic activity compared with other GSTs: they have lower glutathione binding activity, with increased catalytic efficiency (7, 8). Theta is considered the most ancient of the GSTs, and theta-like GSTs are found in almost all organisms investigated (2). The encoded GSTT1 human subunit is about 25,300 Da (9); the gene is 8.1 kb long (10).

Among the GST substrates, there are several environmental carcinogens found in food, air, or medications, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, found in combustion products, diet, and tobacco smoke (11). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are activated by members of the phase 1 cytochrome P-450 supergene family to epoxide-containing metabolites (e.g., benzo[a]pyrene-7,8-diol-9,10-oxide), which are substrates for the mu, alpha, and pi GST classes. GSTT1 is an interesting candidate gene for lung cancer susceptibility because of its involvement in the metabolism of chemicals such as methylating agents, pesticides, and industrial solvents (2). In vitro studies suggest that both GSTT1 and GSTM1 enzymes protect cells from the toxic products of phase 1 detoxification reactions (12, 13).

However, GSTT1-catalyzed reactions can also increase the toxicity of some compounds, such as dichloromethane (2). GSTs also conjugate isothiocyanates, which are potent inducers of enzymes that detoxify environmental mutagens (14). The conjugation process diverts the isothiocyanates from the enzyme induction pathway into excretion (15), leading to elimination of these anticarcinogenic substances (16) and thus decreasing their potential chemopreventive effect (17).


   GENE VARIANTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
The most common polymorphism in GSTT1 consists of a deletion of the whole gene, resulting in the lack of active enzyme (18). Complete deletion at the GSTT1 locus (19) was hypothesized by observing the phenotypic variation in glutathione-related detoxification of halomethanes by human erythrocytes, resulting in "conjugator" and "nonconjugator" phenotypes (20). Recently, another less common polymorphism (Thr104Pro) in the GSTT1 gene was described that also results in a nonconjugator phenotype (21).

The frequency of the GSTT1 deletion varies among different populations (22). In particular, the prevalence of the GSTT1 null genotype is lower among Caucasians (10–20 percent) compared with Asians (50–60 percent) (23). The frequency of the GSTT1 null polymorphism in the controls included in the present meta- and pooled analyses is similar to what was previously published (22): 18.7 percent (meta-analysis) and 19.0 percent (pooled analysis) in Caucasians; 53.8 percent and 53.6 percent, respectively, in Asians; and 19.4 percent (meta-analysis only) for other ethnic groups (Latinos, African Americans, and mixed). The frequency of the GSTT1 deletion is graphically presented in figure 1 for each study included in the meta-analysis and is stratified according to ethnicity. Among Caucasians, the frequency of the deletion is significantly lower in northern European countries (Sweden, Denmark, and Finland) than elsewhere in Europe, as previously reported (22, 24). The frequency of the GSTT1 deletion according to geographic area is 52.2 percent (meta-analysis) and 51.2 percent (pooled analysis) in Asians, 17.3 percent (meta-analysis) and 18.0 percent (pooled analysis) in Europeans, and 21.7 percent (meta-analysis) and 27.0 percent (pooled analysis) in North Americans.


Figure 1
View larger version (7K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		FIGURE 1 Frequency of the glutathione S-transferase gene (GSTT1) deletion in controls from the studies included in the meta-analysis according to ethnicity. The larger white square, diamond, and triangle refer to the average frequency of the GSTT1 deletion in Asians, Caucasians, and others, respectively. The four smaller white and black diamonds correspond to studies performed in the northern European countries (Sweden, Denmark, and Finland), where the frequency of the deletion is significantly lower. 58c/57c and 58o/57o represent, respectively, the frequencies of GSTT1 null in Caucasians and in African Americans for the studies by Cote et al. (58) and Wenzlaff et al. (57).

 
Gene function
The main function of the GST enzymes is detoxification of electrophiles by conjugation to glutathione. A wide variety of both endogenous electrophilic substrates, such as by-products of reactive oxygen species activity, and exogenous electrophilic substrates, have been identified (2, 25). GSTT1 also catalyzes the detoxification of oxidized lipids and DNA (2, 8, 26). Halogenated organic compounds, for example, the ethylene dibromide, p-nitrobenzyl chloride (27), p-nitrophenetyl bromide (28), methyl chloride, and methyl iodide (29, 30), are known substrates for GSTT1. The GSTT1+ phenotype catalyzes conjugation of dichloromethane to glutathione, a metabolic pathway that has been shown to be more mutagenic than GSTT1 null in Salmonella typhimurium mutagenicity tester strains (31) and was suggested to be responsible for the carcinogenicity of dichloromethane in the mouse (32). The consequence of the null genotype is reduced or null conjugation activity and, in most cases, an inability to efficiently eliminate electrophilic carcinogens (19, 33).


   DISEASE
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
Lung cancer is the most common malignancy in the Western world. Although incidence has apparently now peaked in the United States and most of Europe, increasing incidence and mortality is observed in several developing countries. More than a million new cases were diagnosed in 2000, accounting for 12.3 percent of all new cases of cancer, and more than a million subjects died of lung cancer in the same period, accounting for 17.8 percent of all cancer deaths (34). The case fatality (ratio of mortality to incidence), which is an indicator of prognosis, is 0.89, the third worst after that for the pancreas and liver (35).

The main histologic types of lung cancer are squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, large cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma. The first three are also referred to as non–small cell lung carcinomas. Squamous cell carcinoma, large cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma are more strongly associated with smoking than other histologic types. The histologic characteristics of lung cancer have changed in recent decades: the frequency of adenocarcinoma has risen, while that of squamous cell carcinoma has declined (36–39).

Smoking
The main risk factor for lung cancer is tobacco smoking. Worldwide, the population attributable fraction of lung cancer mortality due to smoking is 79 percent for men and 48 percent for women (40). In Western countries, the population attributable fraction due to smoking was estimated to be approximately 90 percent for men and approximately 70 percent for women. Lung cancer risk significantly decreases with smoking cessation; however, the relative risk remains 1.5–2.0 times the risk for never smokers (41). Lung cancer is also associated with environmental tobacco smoke (42). Other risk factors are diet (43), outdoor air pollution, occupational exposures to carcinogens (44), and radon (45).


   ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
The association between GSTT1 and lung cancer was assessed through a meta-analysis of all published papers and a pooled analysis of selected published and unpublished studies. A Medline search was performed from January 1995 (the date when the first case-control studies on GSTT1 and lung cancer were published) to March 2005 using different combinations of the keywords "glutathione S-transferase," "GSTT1," and "lung" without restriction on language. The computer search was supplemented by consulting the bibliographies from the articles found through the Medline search and by looking at two review papers (2, 46). An initial screening of all the abstracts provided 50 articles containing information on both GSTT1 and lung cancer. Eligible were case-control, genotype-based studies that reported the frequency of GSTT1 or the odds ratio for GSTT1 and lung cancer. Both hospital- and population-based case-control studies were included in the analysis. Of the 50 articles selected, excluded were two because they were a pooled analysis of existing data (47, 48), three because they reported on studies that included either only cases of lung cancer (n = 1) or only controls (n = 2), and three because they did not report the frequency of GSTT1 or the odds ratio of lung cancer for GSTT1 deletion. We also excluded eight studies (49–56) because the subjects were the same as those in other studies. In case of multiple publications on the same population, the most recent publications, with the largest group of subjects with data on GSTT1, were always included in this analysis. Two studies (57, 58) were included in the meta-analysis although they contained a small number (35 cases and 79 controls) of overlapping subjects. Therefore, the final number of articles considered for the present analysis was 34 (17, 57–89), including a total of 7,629 cases and 10,087 controls; table 1 describes the studies.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 1 Description of the studies included in the meta-analysis

 
The pooled analysis was performed by using the Genetic Susceptibility to Environmental Carcinogens (GSEC) database (www.gsec.net). The design of this study is explained in detail elsewhere (90). Briefly, this collaborative project gathers information from both published and unpublished case-control studies on metabolic gene polymorphisms and cancer. The investigators who agreed to participate sent their original data sets, with individual genetic and epidemiologic data for each subject. Quality and logical controls on the data are usually performed by the research assistant when entering the data in the main GSEC database. In addition, a questionnaire was provided to each participant at the time of enrollment in the study; it contained information on the study design, the selection and source of controls, the laboratory methods used for genotyping subjects, the source of DNA for genotype analysis, and the response rates for both cases and controls. Some of this information has been published previously (91).

We selected, from the GSEC database, all studies that had information on GSTT1 and lung cancer. We also contacted all investigators of studies for which data were not available through the GSEC project and asked them to provide their data for this specific pooled analysis. We were able to obtain data from 27 of the 34 studies included in the meta-analysis (79 percent; refer to table 1 for details). The number of subjects included in some data sets is slightly different from the published data because they may also include some unpublished data. The GSEC database contained seven additional studies with completely unpublished data on GSTT1 and lung cancer; therefore, the pooled analysis included 34 studies, for a total of 7,044 cases and 10,000 controls.

Statistical analysis
For the meta-analysis, study-specific crude odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals for lung cancer for GSTT1 deletion were estimated on the basis of the reported frequencies of GSTT1 deletion in cases and controls. The Egger test (92) was performed on the overall data sets and after stratification for ethnicity (Caucasians, Asians, other ethnic groups) and source of the control group (healthy or hospitalized controls). Funnel plots were used for a graphic representation of publication bias.

Other ethnic groups were represented by fewer than three studies each and therefore were grouped together as "others" in the analyses on ethnicity. Such ethnic groups included Latinos (one study), African Americans (two studies), and mixed populations (two studies). The hypothesis of homogeneity among studies was tested by the Q statistic, with p values of <0.05 indicating the presence of heterogeneity among studies. The Q statistic was performed on all of the studies and according to ethnicity and type of controls. When the test for heterogeneity was not statistically significant, a fixed-effects model was performed; a random-effects model was used when heterogeneity across studies was statistically observed (93).

Because the frequency of GSTT1 null differs according to ethnicity, summary odds ratios were calculated for all studies combined as well as for subgroups of studies performed with different ethnic groups (Caucasians, Asians, others). Further stratification was performed within each of the three ethnic groups according to type of controls (hospital or healthy controls). Use of hospital-based controls can bias the risk estimates if the diseases of the controls are related to the genetic variant under study.

Pooled analysis was performed separately for the two major ethnic groups (Caucasians and Asians) to avoid the confounding effect of ethnicity already observed in the meta-analysis. Study-specific crude odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals for lung cancer and GSTT1 deletion were estimated, and their homogeneity was tested by using both Q and Breslow-Day's tests. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were calculated for each ethnic group and for the total set of the available studies. Separate analyses were conducted on the studies included in both the meta- and pooled analyses and on the studies present in the pooled analysis only, which had not been previously published. When heterogeneity between studies was observed, a sensitivity analysis was performed by restricting the analysis to the studies for which evidence for heterogeneity of effects was not found. Stratified analyses were conducted according to the type of control population, smoking habits, and histologic type (adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma). For smoking habits, subjects were divided into four classes by using the information on packs of cigarettes smoked times years of smoking. The baseline class included never smokers; the other three classes were created according to tertiles of the variable pack-years. A further analysis on histologic type was performed to assess whether the GSTT1 null polymorphism was more frequent in adenocarcinoma than in squamous cell carcinoma cases (the two histologic types present most often in the data set). For this purpose, crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated.

For studies including Caucasian subjects, the large sample size enabled us to stratify the data according to occupational exposure. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated by using multiple logistic regression models including study number, age (continuous variable), sex, and smoking status (ever/never) as covariates. In the same ethnic group, interactions between GSTT1 deletion and smoking habits and occupational exposure were formally assessed by adding a product term, respectively, to a model containing the main effect of GSTT1, the categories of smoking habits, and the other possible confounding variables (study, age, and sex), and to a model containing the main effect of GSTT1, the categories of occupational exposure (exposed/nonexposed), and the other possible confounding variables (study, age, sex, and smoking habits). Models with or without an interaction term were compared by using the likelihood ratio test. The three studies (65, 74, Dragani (unpublished data)) for which the controls were frequency matched to the cases on smoking were excluded from the analysis of an interaction between GSTT1 and smoking.

The meta-analysis was performed by using the STATA software package (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas). The pooled analysis was conducted by using SAS, version 8e software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina).


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
Meta-analysis
The study-specific odds ratios and the meta-odds ratios for studies including Asian and Caucasian subjects are presented in figure 2. Two studies (57, 58) reported separate analyses for two different ethnic groups (Caucasians and African Americans); therefore, they were included in the analysis of both Caucasians (by calculating the odds ratio for Caucasians only) and the other ethnic groups (by calculating the odds ratio for African Americans only). In the 23 studies on Caucasians, 20 odds ratios were spread around the null effect (nine above the unit and 11 under the unit); only one study (65) reported a significant positive association between lung cancer and GSTT1 null (odds ratio (OR) = 2.65, 95 percent confidence interval (CI): 1.44, 4.90), whereas two studies (59, 72) reported a significant negative association (OR = 0.63, 95 percent CI: 0.42, 0.95 and OR = 0.51, 95 percent CI: 0.28, 0.94, respectively). For Asians, all but one study found odds ratios above 1.00, with three studies (80, 83, 86) reaching statistical significance. The odds ratios in studies including Asian subjects ranged from 0.91 (95 percent CI: 0.67, 1.23) to 2.06 (95 percent CI: 1.30, 3.24). Among the other five studies on different ethnic groups, one (89) reported a very high risk (OR = 5.04, 95 percent CI: 1.79, 14.31) of lung cancer for Latino subjects carrying GSTT1 null; the other four studies, conducted in mixed populations (87, 88) and among African-American subjects (57, 58), reported no association between GSTT1 deletion and lung cancer.


Figure 2
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		FIGURE 2 Study-specific and meta-log(odds ratios) with 95% confidence intervals for glutathione S-transferase gene (GSTT1) null and lung cancer according to ethnicity.

 
The meta-odds ratios in table 2 refer to the analyses conducted on all studies and on stratified data. The meta-odds ratio for all studies combined was 1.07 (95 percent CI: 0.96, 1.19), with a large heterogeneity (Q-test p < 0.001) and evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p = 0.02). The sensitivity analysis indicated that by excluding five studies (65, 80, 81, 83, 89), the evidence of publication bias was reduced under the significance level (Egger's test p = 0.14), and heterogeneity was no longer present among the studies (Q-test p = 0.23). The meta-odds ratio calculated after exclusion of these five studies was lower (OR = 0.94, 95 percent CI: 0.88, 1.01). Of the five excluded studies, three included Asians, one Latinos, and one Caucasians; therefore, we attributed a large part of the observed heterogeneity to ethnicity.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 2 Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between GSTT1* and lung cancer: meta analysis

 
In the analysis stratified by ethnicity, no association was observed between GSTT1 deletion and lung cancer among Caucasian subjects (OR = 0.99, 95 percent CI: 0.87, 1.12), with heterogeneity between the studies still present (Q-test p = 0.02) but no evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p = 0.42). Heterogeneity was not present after exclusion of the only study that presented a case-cohort design (65).

Among Asians, a significant positive association was found between lung cancer and the GSTT1 null genotype (meta-OR = 1.28, 95 percent CI: 1.10, 1.49). The test for heterogeneity was not statistically significant for the eight studies including Asian subjects (Q-test p = 0.09), and no evidence of publication bias was observed (Egger's test p = 0.16).

For all the other studies on different ethnic groups, the meta-odds ratio was 1.08 (95 percent CI: 0.72, 1.59), with heterogeneity (Q-test p = 0.02) but no evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p = 0.28). The heterogeneity was probably due to the different ethnicities included in these studies. Table 2 presents the meta-odds ratios stratified according to type of controls and according to ethnicity. For Caucasians, the association with GSTT1 null was stronger in the analysis conducted of studies including healthy subjects (OR = 1.08, 95 percent CI: 0.96, 1.21) than that for studies including hospital controls (OR = 0.79, 95 percent CI: 0.67, 0.93). Among the studies including Asian subjects, a significant association between GSTT1 deletion and lung cancer was observed only when the analysis was restricted to studies including hospital controls (OR = 1.47, 95 percent CI: 1.15, 1.87), whereas such an association was less evident for studies including healthy controls (OR = 1.18, 95 percent CI: 0.97, 1.42). No heterogeneity or publication bias was found in these stratified analyses (results not shown).

Pooled analysis
Crude study-specific odds ratios and 95 percent confidence intervals are reported in table 3 for Asians and table 4 for Caucasians. No heterogeneity between studies including Asian subjects was observed; for Caucasians, the test for heterogeneity was statistically significant. However, exclusion of one case-cohort study (65) made the sample statistically homogenous (p for Q and Breslow-Day's tests = 0.09).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 3 Description of Asian studies included in the pooled analysis: study-specific crude odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 4 Description of Caucasian studies included in the pooled analysis: study-specific crude odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals

 
The summary odds ratios of lung cancer for GSTT1 null and lung cancer are presented in table 5 for Asians and table 6 for Caucasians. The adjusted summary odds ratios for all studies combined were not significant for Asians (OR = 0.97, 95 percent CI: 0.83, 1.13) or for Caucasians (OR = 1.09, 95 percent CI: 0.99, 1.21). Among Caucasians, when the analysis was restricted to the studies for which the test for heterogeneity was not statistically significant, lower odds ratios were observed. If the analysis was restricted to studies included in both the meta- and pooled analyses, the odds ratios became similar to the summary odds ratios obtained from the meta-analysis. The analysis restricted to studies included in the pooled analysis only, which include unpublished data on GSTT1 and lung cancer, showed lower odds ratios for both Asian and Caucasian subjects. For both Asians and Caucasians, higher adjusted summary odds ratios were found when the analysis included healthy controls in comparison with hospitalized controls.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 5 Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between GSTT1* and lung cancer: pooled analysis on Asian subjects

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 6 Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between GSTT1* and lung cancer: pooled analysis on Caucasian subjects

 
A stratified analysis according to smoking status was performed by using the information on packs of cigarettes smoked times years of smoking, available for 2,642 of the 3,129 Asians (84 percent) and for 9,950 of the 13,511 Caucasians (74 percent). The observed association between GSTT1 and lung cancer was present, although nonsignificant, among never smokers, but it decreased with increasing amount of smoking for both Asians and Caucasians (figure 3).


Figure 3
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		FIGURE 3 Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the glutathione S-transferase gene (GSTT1) deletion and lung cancer according to smoking habits (tertiles of pack-years): pooled analysis for Asians and Caucasians. ORs were adjusted for study, sex, and age (continuous variable). Asian never smokers: OR = 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77, 1.32; light smokers (0–22 pack-years): OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.64, 1.48; medium smokers (23–42 pack-years): OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.68, 1.42; heavy smokers (≥43 pack-years): OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.59, 1.21. Caucasian never smokers: OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.48; light smokers (0–22 pack-years): OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.51; medium smokers (23–43 pack-years): OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.93, 1.44; heavy smokers (≥44 pack-years): OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.78, 1.20. p for Breslow-Day's test for homogeneity = 0.96 for Asians and 0.37 for Caucasians.

 
Small cell carcinoma was associated with GSTT1 deletion in Asian subjects (crude OR = 1.96, 95 percent CI: 1.15, 3.23), but the odds ratio was not statistically significant after adjusting for study, age, gender, and smoking (adjusted OR = 1.45, 95 percent CI: 0.76, 2.77). No association was found between GSTT1 and the other histologic types in the two ethnic groups (table 7). The adjusted odds ratio for adenocarcinoma in comparison with squamous cell carcinoma with GSTT1 deletion was 0.94 (95 percent CI: 0.65, 1.36) for Asian subjects and 1.03 (95 percent CI: 0.83, 1.29) for Caucasian subjects.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 7 Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between GSTT1* deletion and lung cancer, stratified according to histologic type: pooled analysis on Asians and Caucasians

 
The large sample of Caucasians enabled us to perform a stratified analysis according to the presence of occupational exposure. The information was available for 4,719 of 13,511 subjects (35 percent), and the results are reported in table 8. A significant protective effect of GSTT1 deletion on lung cancer was observed for subjects occupationally exposed. Because the agents reported in the data set were extremely heterogeneous (chemicals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, asbestos, metals, radiation, etc.), we restricted the analysis to asbestos exposure and found the same protective effect (table 8).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 8 Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between GSTT1* deletion and lung cancer, stratified according to occupational exposure: pooled analysis on Caucasians

 
There was no statistical evidence of multiplicative interaction between GSTT1 and smoking for Caucasians (p for the likelihood ratio test = 0.90). A significant antagonist effect of occupational exposure and GSTT1 deletion was observed, with an odds ratio for interaction of 0.69 (95 percent CI: 0.51, 0.94, p for the likelihood ratio test = 0.02; table 9). However, when we restricted the analysis to asbestos exposure, the interaction with GSTT1 was nonsignificant (p for the likelihood ratio test = 0.08; table 9), although subjects carrying the GSTT1 deletion and exposed to asbestos had a lower risk of developing cancer in comparison with not occupationally exposed subjects in whom GSTT1 was present (OR = 0.59, 95 percent CI: 0.41, 0.86).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 9 Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the main effect and interaction of GSTT1,* occupational exposure (all chemicals agents and asbestos only), and lung cancer: pooled analysis on Caucasians

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
The meta-analysis highlighted a higher risk of developing lung cancer for Asian subjects carrying the GSTT1 null genotype (OR = 1.28, 95 percent CI: 1.10, 1.49), but the pooled analysis did not confirm this result (adjusted OR = 0.97, 95 percent CI: 0.83, 1.13). The lower odds ratio observed in the pooled analysis was mainly due to two unpublished studies (Sugimura, Kang), which reported a nonsignificant negative association between GSTT1 and lung cancer. No significant association between lung cancer and GSTT1 deletion was present in Caucasian subjects in either the meta-analysis or the pooled analysis. Our results were consistent with a previously published pooled analysis on a subset of subjects included in this study that showed no statistically significant effect of GSTT1 null on lung cancer for Caucasians at younger ages (47). The deletion in the GSTT1 gene was not associated with lung cancer in two previous reviews (2, 46), even though both authors underlined that GSTT1 deletion could play a role in lung carcinogenesis when GSTM1 is concurrently lacking.

Because both smoking and occupational exposure are independent risk factors for lung cancer, we studied their interaction with GSTT1 by using the pooled data set of individual data. We found no significant interaction between GSTT1 and lifetime tobacco consumption on lung cancer; however, a negative trend of the odds ratios with increasing amount of lifetime smoking was observed for both Caucasians and Asians. This finding could be explained by the relevant role of genetic factors at low-dose-carcinogen exposures (94–97). The lack of interaction between GSTT1 and smoking is consistent with the hypothesis that polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, carcinogenic compounds found in tobacco smoke, are minor substrates for GSTT1 (2).

A significant negative interaction was observed between being occupationally exposed and GSTT1: exposed subjects for whom GSTT1 was present were at higher risk of lung cancer than exposed subjects carrying the GSTT1 null genotype. It has to be kept in mind that the information on occupational exposure available through the GSEC database is very limited. For example, the data set contains information on only broad categories of agents to which subjects were occupationally exposed; no information on amount or length of exposure is available. Therefore, a more in-depth analysis of this interesting result was not possible. A possible hypothesis is that some compounds present in occupational settings—such as dichloromethane and other halogenated compounds, known substrates of GSTT1—are transformed by GSTT1 into mutagenic intermediates; thus, GSTT1-positive subjects might be more prone than GSTT1-null subjects to the genotoxic action of halogenated compounds via the GSTT1 pathway (2). Some translational studies on intermediate biomarkers of exposure and effect suggest that subjects carrying the GSTT1 deletion may have lower levels of the biomarkers than subjects with the functional GSTT1, pointing at a different role of GSTT1 on cancer causation (98–104).

To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive meta- and pooled analysis assessing the role of GSTT1 deletion on lung cancer, and the only one on Asians. The large number of cancer cases included in this analysis (N = 6,633) provided 100 percent statistical power to find an odds ratio of 1.5 for both Asians and Caucasians. Because the data set includes information on sex and age, it was possible to adjust the odds ratios for the confounding effect of these variables, and we could perform stratified analyses for both smoking status and occupational exposure in Caucasians. The availability of information on potential confounding variables makes the pooled-analyses preferable to the meta-analysis (105). Furthermore, meta-analyses are restricted to published reports and may lead to biased results if publication bias is present; pooled analysis avoids this problem by also including unpublished studies. In our meta-analysis, no evidence of publication bias was found after stratifying for ethnicity. However, for Asian studies, we observed a lower and no longer statistically significant odds ratio when the pooled analysis including unpublished studies was performed.

A limitation of both meta- and pooled analysis could be the presence of heterogeneity between studies. We verified the hypothesis of homogeneity, and we performed sensitivity analyses by excluding studies that were a source of heterogeneity. Another possible limitation could be the different method of recruiting controls in the various studies. We considered this possible source of bias by performing a stratified analysis according to the source of controls, in both the meta- and the pooled analysis. Data on hospital controls should provide lower risk estimates if the diseases of the controls were associated with the gene variant under study. We confirmed this hypothesis in the pooled analysis only.


   LABORATORY TESTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
The detailed methods used for determining the GSTT1 genotype are described in each article. Most of the studies included in the present analyses used genomic DNA extracted from blood. One study also used bronchial lavage (68), one study used paraffin-embedded tissues and buccal swabs (58) in addition to blood, and one study used only buccal cells (86). All of the articles reported the use of polymerase chain reaction, with different polymerase chain reaction conditions and different control samples.


   POPULATION TESTING
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 
To date, there is insufficient evidence on the role of GSTT1 in the etiology of lung cancer to make population testing an issue.


   CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESEARCH
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
References
 
No significant association was found between lung cancer and GSTT1 deletion either overall or in Caucasians. Among Asians, a positive association was found (OR = 1.28, 95 percent CI: 1.10, 1.49) in the meta-analysis, whereas the association was not confirmed in the pooled analysis (OR = 0.97, 95 percent CI: 0.83, 1.13). GSTT1 appeared to modulate occupational-related lung cancer, at least for asbestos exposure. Further research on GSTT1 in occupationally exposed subjects and in lung cancer patients, including the use of intermediate biomarkers of exposure and effect, will be useful to clarify the role of GSTT1 deletion in the carcinogenic process. Specific studies including subjects exposed to human lung carcinogens could be relevant. Interaction between GSTT1 and other genetic polymorphisms involved in metabolism of environmental carcinogens would be useful to evaluate the possible combined effect of several genetic variants in relation to specific environmental exposures.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
This study was partially supported by Environmental Cancer Risk, Nutrition and Individual Susceptibility (ECNIS) contract 513943.

Conflict of interest: none declared.


   NOTES
 
Editor's note: This paper is also available on the website of the Human Genome Epidemiology Network (http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/hugenet/).


   References
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 GENE
 GENE VARIANTS
 DISEASE
 ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERACTIONS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LABORATORY TESTS
 POPULATION TESTING
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...
 References
 

  1. Hayes JD and Pulford DJ. (1995) The glutathione S-transferase supergene family: regulation of GST and the contribution of the isoenzymes to cancer chemoprotection and drug resistance. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 30:445–600.[Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Landi S. (2000) Mammalian class theta GST and differential susceptibility to carcinogens: a review. Mutat Res 463:247–83.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  3. Hayes JD, Flanagan JU, Jowsey IR. (2005) Glutathione transferases. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 45:51–88.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Eaton DL and Bammler TK. (1999) Concise review of the glutathione S-transferases and their significance to toxicology. Toxicol Sci 49:156–64.[Free Full Text]
  5. Tan KL, Webb GC, Baker RT, et al. (1995) Molecular cloning of a cDNA and chromosomal localization of a human theta-class glutathione S-transferase gene (GSTT2) to chromosome 22. Genomics 25:381–7.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Webb G, Vaska V, Coggan M, et al. (1996) Chromosomal localization of the gene for the human theta class glutathione transferase (GSTT1). Genomics 33:121–3.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Meyer DJ. (1993) Significance of an unusually low Km for glutathione in glutathione transferases of the alpha, mu and pi classes. Xenobiotica 23:823–34.[Web of Science][Medline]
  8. Jemth P and Mannervik B. (1997) Kinetic characterization of recombinant human glutathione transferase T1-1, a polymorphic detoxication enzyme. Arch Biochem Biophys 348:247–54.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  9. Juronen E, Tasa G, Uuskula M, et al. (1996) Purification, characterization and tissue distribution of human class theta glutathione S-transferase T1-1. Biochem Mol Biol Int 39:21–9.[Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Coggan M, Whitbread L, Whittington A, et al. (1998) Structure and organization of the human theta-class glutathione S-transferase and D-dopachrome tautomerase gene complex. Biochem J 334:617–23.
  11. Hirvonen A. (1995) Genetic factors in individual responses to environmental exposures. J Occup Environ Med 37:37–43.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Wiencke JK, Kelsey KT, Lamela RA, et al. (1990) Human glutathione S-transferase deficiency as a marker of susceptibility to epoxide-induced cytogenetic damage. Cancer Res 50:1585–90.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Norppa H, Hirvonen A, Jarventaus H, et al. (1995) Role of GSTT1 and GSTM1 genotypes in determining individual sensitivity to sister chromatid exchange induction by diepoxybutane in cultured human lymphocytes. Carcinogenesis 16:1261–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Prochaska HJ, Santamaria AB, Talalay P. (1992) Rapid detection of inducers of enzymes that protect against carcinogens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89:2394–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Lin HJ, Probst-Hensch NM, Louie AD, et al. (1998) Glutathione transferase null genotype, broccoli, and lower prevalence of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7:647–52.[Abstract]
  16. Zhang Y, Kolm RH, Mannervik B, et al. (1995) Reversible conjugation of isothiocyanates with glutathione catalyzed by human glutathione transferases. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 206:748–55.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  17. London SJ, Yuan JM, Chung FL, et al. (2000) Isothiocyanates, glutathione S-transferase M1 and T1 polymorphisms, and lung-cancer risk: a prospective study of men in Shanghai, China. Lancet 356:724–9.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Sprenger R, Schlagenhaufer R, Kerb R, et al. (2000) Characterization of the glutathione S-transferase GSTT1 deletion: discrimination of all genotypes by polymerase chain reaction indicates a trimodular genotype-phenotype correlation. Pharmacogenetics 10:557–65.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  19. Pemble S, Schroeder KR, Spencer SR, et al. (1994) Human glutathione S-transferase theta (GSTT1): cDNA cloning and the characterization of a genetic polymorphism. Biochem J 300:271–6.
  20. Hallier E, Langhof T, Dannappel D, et al. (1993) Polymorphism of glutathione conjugation of methyl bromide, ethylene oxide and dichloromethane in human blood: influence on the induction of sister chromatid exchanges (SCE) in lymphocytes. Arch Toxicol 67:173–8.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Alexandrie AK, Rannug A, Juronen E, et al. (2002) Detection and characterization of a novel functional polymorphism in the GSTT1 gene. Pharmacogenetics 12:613–19.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  22. Garte S, Gaspari L, Alexandrie AK, et al. (2001) Metabolic gene polymorphism frequencies in control populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:1239–48.[Medline]
  23. Nelson HH, Wiencke JK, Christiani DC, et al. (1995) Ethnic differences in the prevalence of the homozygous deleted genotype of glutathione S-transferase theta. Carcinogenesis 16:1243–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Warholm M, Alexandrie AK, Högberg J, et al. (1994) Polymorphic distribution of glutathione transferase activity with methyl chloride in human blood. Pharmacogenetics 4:307–11.[Web of Science][Medline]
  25. Strange RC, Spiteri MA, Ramachandran S, et al. (2001) Glutathione-S-transferase family of enzymes. Mutat Res 482:21–6.[Web of Science][Medline]
  26. Bao Y, Jemth P, Mannervik B, et al. (1997) Reduction of thymine hydroperoxide by phospholipids hydroperoxide glutathione peroxidase and glutathione transferases. FEBS Lett 410:210–12.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  27. Whittington A, Vichai V, Webb G, et al. (1999) Gene structure, expression and chromosomal localization of murine theta class glutathione transferase mGSTT1-1. Biochem J 337:141–51.
  28. Meyer DJ, Coles B, Pemble SE, et al. (1991) Theta, a new class of glutathione transferases purified from rat and man. Biochem J 274:409–14.
  29. Chamberlain MP, Lock EA, Gaskell BA, et al. (1998) The role of glutathione S-transferase- and cytochrome P450-dependent metabolism in the olfactory toxicity of methyl iodide in the rat. Arch Toxicol 72:420–8.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  30. DeMarini DM, Shelton ML, Warren SH, et al. (1997) Glutathione S-transferase-mediated induction of GC->AT transitions by halomethanes in Salmonella. Environ Mol Mutagen 30:440–7.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  31. Shimada T, Yamazaki H, Oda Y, et al. (1996) Activation and inactivation of carcinogenic dihaloalkanes and other compounds by glutathione S-transferase 5-5 in Salmonella typhimurium tester strain NM5004. Chem Res Toxicol 9:333–40.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  32. Sherratt PJ, Pulford DJ, Harrison DJ, et al. (1997) Evidence that human class Theta glutathione S-transferase T1-1 can catalyse the activation of dichloromethane, a liver and lung carcinogen in the mouse. Comparison of the tissue distribution of GST T1-1 with that of classes Alpha, Mu and Pi GST in human. Biochem J 326:837–46.
  33. Hallier E, Schroder KR, Asmuth K, et al. (1994) Metabolism of dichloromethane (methylene chloride) to formaldehyde in human erythrocytes: influence of polymorphism of glutathione transferase theta (GSTT1-1). Arch Toxicol 68:423–7.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  34. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. (2001) Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer 94:153–6.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  35. Cancer incidence in five continents. (2002) (International Agency for Research on CancerIn Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J (Eds.), et al. , Lyon, France) Vol VIII: (IARC scientific publication no. 155).
  36. Wingo PA, Ries LA, Giovino GA, et al. (1999) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1973 –1996, with a special section on lung cancer and tobacco smoking. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:675–90.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Wynder EL and Muscat JE. (1995) The changing epidemiology of smoking and lung cancer histology. Environ Health Perspect 103:143–8.
  38. Travis WD, Lubin J, Ries L, et al. (1996) United States lung carcinoma incidence trends: declining for most histologic types among males, increasing among females. Cancer 77:2464–70.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  39. Charloux A, Quoix E, Wolkove N, et al. (1997) The increasing incidence of lung adenocarcinoma: reality or artefact? A review of the epidemiology of lung adenocarcinoma. Int J Epidemiol 26:14–23.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Ezzati M and Lopez AD. (2003) Estimates of global mortality attributable to smoking in 2000. Lancet 362:847–52.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  41. Becher H, Jockel KH, Timm J, et al. (1991) Smoking cessation and nonsmoking intervals: effect of different smoking patterns on lung cancer risk. Cancer Causes Control 2:381–7.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  42. Zhong L, Goldberg MS, Parent ME, et al. (2000) Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and the risk of lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Lung Cancer 27:3–18.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  43. Willett WC. (1995) Diet, nutrition, and avoidable cancer. Environ Health Perspect 103:suppl 8, 165–70.
  44. Boffetta P and Nyberg F. (2003) Contribution of environmental factors to cancer risk. Br Med Bull 68:71–94.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. National Research Council (NBC). (1988) Committee on Health Risks of Exposures to Radon, Board on Radiation Effects Research. Health effects of exposure to radon (BEIR VI). (National Academy Press, Washington, DC).
  46. Reszka E and Wasowicz W. (2001) Significance of genetic polymorphisms in glutathione S-transferase multigene family and lung cancer risk. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 14:99–113.[Medline]
  47. Taioli E, Gaspari L, Benhamou S, et al. (2003) Polymorphisms in CYP1A1, GSTM1, GSTT1 and lung cancer below the age of 45 years. Int J Epidemiol 32:60–3.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Stucker I, Boffetta P, Antilla S, et al. (2001) Lack of interaction between asbestos exposure and glutathione S-transferase M1 and T1 genotypes in lung carcinogenesis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:1253–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. El-Zein R, Zwischenberger JB, Wood TG, et al. (1997) Combined genetic polymorphism and risk for development of lung cancer. Mutat Res 381:189–200.[Web of Science][Medline]
  50. El-Zein R, Conforti-Froes N, Au WW. (1997) Interactions between genetic predisposition and environmental toxicants for development of lung cancer. Environ Mol Mutagen 30:196–204.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  51. El-Zein RA, Zwischenberger JB, Abdel-Rahman SZ, et al. (1997) Polymorphism of metabolizing genes and lung cancer histology: prevalence of CYP2E1 in adenocarcinoma. Cancer Lett 112:71–8.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  52. Kelsey KT, Spitz MR, Zuo ZF, et al. (1997) Polymorphisms in the glutathione S-transferase class mu and theta genes interact and increase susceptibility to lung cancer in minority populations (Texas, United States). Cancer Causes Control 8:554–9.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  53. To-Figueras J, Gene M, Gomez-Catalan J, et al. (1997) Glutathione S-transferase M1 (GSTM1) and T1 (GSTT1) polymorphisms and lung cancer risk among northwestern Mediterraneans. Carcinogenesis 18:1529–33.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Lan Q, He X, Costa D, et al. (1999) Glutathione S-transferase GSTM1 and GSTT1 genotypes and susceptibility to lung cancer. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu 28:9–11.[Medline]
  55. To-Figueras J, Gene M, Gomez-Catalan J, et al. (2001) Lung cancer susceptibility in relation to combined polymorphisms of microsomal epoxide hydrolase and glutathione S-transferase P1. Cancer Lett 173:155–62.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  56. Cajas-Salazar N, Sierra-Torres CH, Salama SA, et al. (2003) Combined effect of MPO, GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms on chromosome aberrations and lung cancer risk. Int J Hyg Environ Health 206:473–83.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  57. Wenzlaff AS, Cote ML, Bock CH, et al. (2005) GSTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1 polymorphisms, environmental tobacco smoke exposure and risk of lung cancer among never smokers: a population-based study. Carcinogenesis 26:395–401.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Cote ML, Kardia SL, Wenzlaff AS, et al. (2005) Combinations of glutathione S-transferase genotypes and risk of early-onset lung cancer in Caucasians and African Americans: a population-based study. Carcinogenesis 26:811–19.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Reszka E, Wasowicz W, Gromadzinska J, et al. (2005) Evaluation of selenium, zinc and copper levels related to GST genetic polymorphism in lung cancer patients. Trace Elem Electrolytes 22:23–32.
  60. Alexandrie AK, Nyberg F, Warholm M, et al. (2004) Influence of CYP1A1, GSTM1, GSTT1, and NQO1 genotypes and cumulative smoking dose on lung cancer risk in a Swedish population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13:908–14.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  61. Belogubova EV, Togo AV, Karpova MB, et al. (2004) A novel approach for assessment of cancer predisposing roles of GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes: use of putatively cancer resistant elderly tumor-free smokers as the referents. Lung Cancer 43:259–66.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  62. Harms C, Salama SA, Sierra-Torres CH, et al. (2004) Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes, chromosome aberrations, and lung cancer. Environ Mol Mutagen 44:74–82.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  63. Schneider J, Bernges U, Philipp M, et al. (2004) GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1 polymorphism and lung cancer risk in relation to tobacco smoking. Cancer Lett 208:65–74.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  64. Sobti RC, Sharma S, Joshi A, et al. (2004) Genetic polymorphism of the CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes and lung cancer susceptibility in a north Indian population. Mol Cell Biochem 266:1–9.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  65. Sørensen M, Autrup H, Tjonneland A, et al. (2004) Glutathione S-transferase T1 null-genotype is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. Int J Cancer 110:219–24.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  66. Dialyna IA, Miyakis S, Georgatou N, et al. (2003) Genetic polymorphisms of CYP1A1, GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes and lung cancer risk. Oncol Rep 10:1829–35.[Web of Science][Medline]
  67. Ruano-Ravina A, Figueiras A, Loidi L, et al. (2003) GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms, tobacco and risk of lung cancer: a case-control study from Galicia, Spain. Anticancer Res 23:4333–7.[Web of Science][Medline]
  68. Lewis SJ, Cherry NM, Niven RM, et al. (2002) GSTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1 polymorphisms and lung cancer risk. Cancer Lett 180:165–71.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  69. Stucker I, Hirvonen A, de Waziers I, et al. (2002) Genetic polymorphisms of glutathione S-transferases as modulators of lung cancer susceptibility. Carcinogenesis 23:1475–81.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  70. Hou SM, Falt S, Nyberg F. (2001) Glutathione S-transferase T1-null genotype interacts synergistically with heavy smoking on lung cancer risk. Environ Mol Mutagen 38:83–6.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  71. Liu G, Miller DP, Zhou W, et al. (2001) Differential association of the codon 72 p53 and GSTM1 polymorphisms on histological subtype of non-small cell lung carcinoma. Cancer Res 61:8718–22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  72. Risch A, Wikman H, Thiel S, et al. (2001) Glutathione-S-transferase M1, M3, T1 and P1 polymorphisms and susceptibility to non-small-cell lung cancer subtypes and hamartomas. Pharmacogenetics 11:757–64.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  73. Malats N, Camus-Radon AM, Nyberg F, et al. (2000) Lung cancer risk in nonsmokers and GSTM1 and GSTT1 genetic polymorphism. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:827–33.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  74. Spitz MR, Duphorne CM, Detry MA, et al. (2000) Dietary intake of isothiocyanates: evidence of a joint effect with glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms in lung cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:1017–20.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  75. To-Figueras J, Gene M, Gomez-Catalan J, et al. (1999) Genetic polymorphism of glutathione S-transferase P1 gene and lung cancer risk. Cancer Causes Control 10:65–70.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  76. Saarikoski ST, Voho A, Reinikainen M, et al. (1998) Combined effect of polymorphic GST genes on individual susceptibility to lung cancer. Int J Cancer 77:516–21.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  77. Salagovic J, Kalina I, Stubna J, et al. (1998) Genetic polymorphism of glutathione S-transferases M1 and T1 as a risk factor in lung and bladder cancers. Neoplasma 45:312–17.[Web of Science][Medline]
  78. Jourenkova N, Reinikanen M, Bouchardy C, et al. (1997) Effects of glutathione S-transferases GSTM1 and GSTT1 genotypes on lung cancer risk in smokers. Pharmacogenetics 7:515–18.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  79. Deakin M, Elder J, Hendrickse C, et al. (1996) Glutathione S-transferase GSTT1 genotypes and susceptibility to cancer: studies of interactions with GSTM1 in lung, oral, gastric and colorectal cancers. Carcinogenesis 17:881–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  80. Chan-Yeung M, Tan-Un KC, Ip MS, et al. (2004) Lung cancer susceptibility and polymorphisms of glutathione-S-transferase genes in Hong Kong. Lung Cancer 45:155–60.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  81. Liang GY, Pu YP, Yin LH. (2004) Studies of the genes related to lung cancer susceptibility in Nanjing Han population, China. (In Chinese). Yi Chuan 26: pp. 584–8.[Medline]
  82. Wang J, Deng Y, Cheng J, et al. (2003) GST genetic polymorphisms and lung adenocarcinoma susceptibility in a Chinese population. Cancer Lett 201:185–93.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  83. Sunaga N, Kohno T, Yanagitani N, et al. (2002) Contribution of the NQO1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms to lung adenocarcinoma susceptibility. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11:730–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  84. Zhao B, Seow A, Lee EJ, et al. (2001) Dietary isothiocyanates, glutathione S-transferase -M1, -T1 polymorphisms and lung cancer risk among Chinese women in Singapore. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:1063–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  85. Kiyohara C, Yamamura KI, Nakanishi Y, et al. (2000) Polymorphism in GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1 and susceptibility to lung cancer in a Japanese population. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 1:293–8.[Medline]
  86. Lan Q, He X, Costa DJ, et al. (2000) Indoor coal combustion emissions, GSTM1 and GSTT1 genotypes, and lung cancer risk: a case-control study in Xuan Wei, China. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:605–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  87. Yang P, Bamlet WR, Ebbert JO, et al. (2004) Glutathione pathway genes and lung cancer risk in young and old populations. Carcinogenesis 25:1935–44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  88. Nazar-Stewart V, Vaughan TL, Stapleton P, et al. (2003) A population-based study of glutathione S-transferase M1, T1 and P1 genotypes and risk for lung cancer. Lung Cancer 40:247–58.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  89. Gallegos-Arreola MP, Gomez-Meda BC, Morgan-Villela G, et al. (2003–2004) GSTT1 gene deletion is associated with lung cancer in Mexican patients. Dis Markers 19:259–61.
  90. Taioli E. (1999) International collaborative study on genetic susceptibility to environmental carcinogens. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8:727–8.[Free Full Text]
  91. Gaspari L, Marinelli D, Taioli E, et al. (2001) International collaborative study on genetic susceptibility to environmental carcinogens (GSEC): an update. Int J Hyg Environ Health 204:39–42.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  92. Egger M, Smith D, Schneider M, et al. (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–34.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  93. Normand SL. (1999) Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Stat Med 18:321–59.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  94. Vineis P, Bartsch H, Caporaso N, et al. (1994) Genetically based N-acetyltransferase metabolic polymorphism and low-level environmental exposure to carcinogens. Nature 369:154–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
  95. Garte S, Zocchetti C, Taioli E. (1997) Gene-environment interactions in the application of biomarkers of cancer susceptibility in epidemiology. IARC Sci Publ 142:251–64.
  96. Hung RJ, Boffetta P, Brockmöller J, et al. (2003) CYP1A1 and GSTM1 genetic polymorphisms and lung cancer risk in Caucasian nonsmokers: a pooled analysis. Carcinogenesis 24:875–82.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  97. Raimondi S, Boffetta P, Anttila S, et al. (2005) Metabolic gene polymorphism and lung cancer risk in non-smokers: an update of the GSEC study. Mutat Res 592:45–57.[Web of Science][Medline]
  98. Brockstedt U, Krajinovic M, Richer C, et al. (2002) Analyses of bulky DNA adduct levels in human breast tissue and genetic polymorphisms of cytochromes P450 (CYPs), myeloperoxidase (MPO), quinone oxidoreductase (NQO1), and glutathione S-transferases (GSTs). Mutat Res 516:41–7.[Web of Science][Medline]
  99. Viezzer C, Norppa H, Clonfero E, et al. (1999) Influence of GSTM1, GSTT1, GSTP1, and EPHX gene polymorphisms on DNA adduct level and HPRT mutant frequency in coke-oven workers. Mutat Res 431:259–69.[Web of Science][Medline]
  100. Laffon B, Perez-Cadahia B, Pasaro E, et al. (2003) Effect of epoxide hydrolase and glutathione S-transferase genotypes on the induction of micronuclei and DNA damage by styrene-7,8-oxide in vitro. Mutat Res 536:49–59.[Web of Science][Medline]
  101. Yong LC, Schulte PA, Wiencke JK, et al. (2001) Hemoglobin adducts and sister chromatid exchanges in hospital workers exposed to ethylene oxide: effects of glutathione S-transferase T1 and M1 genotypes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:539–50.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  102. Marcon F, Andreoli C, Rossi S, et al. (2003) Assessment of individual sensitivity to ionizing radiation and DNA repair efficiency in a healthy population. Mutat Res 541:1–8.[Web of Science][Medline]
  103. Scarpato R, Migliore L, Hirvonen A, et al. (1996) Cytogenetic monitoring of occupational exposure to pesticides: characterization of GSTM1, GSTT1, and NAT2 genotypes. Environ Mol Mutagen 27:263–9.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  104. Lodovici M, Luceri C, Guglielmi F, et al. (2004) Benzo(a)pyrene diolepoxide (BPDE)-DNA adduct levels in leukocytes of smokers in relation to polymorphism of CYP1A1, GSTM1, GSTP1, GSTT1, and mEH. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13:1342–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  105. Blettner M, Sauerbrei W, Schlehofer B, et al. (1999) Traditional reviews, meta-analyses and pooled analyses in epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol 28:1–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
C. M. Rudin, E. Avila-Tang, C. C. Harris, J. G. Herman, F. R. Hirsch, W. Pao, A. G. Schwartz, K. H. Vahakangas, and J. M. Samet
Lung Cancer in Never Smokers: Molecular Profiles and Therapeutic Implications
Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2009; 15(18): 5646 - 5661.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Vet PatholHome page
A. K. Bauer and E. A. Rondini
REVIEW PAPER: The Role of Inflammation in Mouse Pulmonary Neoplasia
Vet. Pathol., May 1, 2009; 46(3): 369 - 390.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
M. L. Cote, W. Yoo, A. S. Wenzlaff, G. M. Prysak, S. K. Santer, G. B. Claeys, A. L. Van Dyke, S. J. Land, and A. G. Schwartz
Tobacco and estrogen metabolic polymorphisms and risk of non-small cell lung cancer in women
Carcinogenesis, April 1, 2009; 30(4): 626 - 635.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
W. D. Foulkes
Inherited Susceptibility to Common Cancers
N. Engl. J. Med., November 13, 2008; 359(20): 2143 - 2153.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
E. Taioli
Gene-environment interaction in tobacco-related cancers
Carcinogenesis, August 1, 2008; 29(8): 1467 - 1474.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
D. W. Bell, B. W. Brannigan, K. Matsuo, D. M. Finkelstein, R. Sordella, J. Settleman, T. Mitsudomi, and D. A. Haber
Increased Prevalence of EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancer in Women and in East Asian Populations: Analysis of Estrogen-Related Polymorphisms
Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2008; 14(13): 4079 - 4084.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
N. S. Weiss
Subgroup-Specific Associations in the Face of Overall Null Results: Should We Rush In or Fear to Tread?
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2008; 17(6): 1297 - 1299.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JAMAHome page
L. M. Dong, J. D. Potter, E. White, C. M. Ulrich, L. R. Cardon, and U. Peters
Genetic Susceptibility to Cancer: The Role of Polymorphisms in Candidate Genes
JAMA, May 28, 2008; 299(20): 2423 - 2436.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
K.-M. Lee, D. Kang, M. L. Clapper, M. Ingelman-Sundberg, M. Ono-Kihara, C. Kiyohara, S. Min, Q. Lan, L. Le Marchand, P. Lin, et al.
CYP1A1, GSTM1, and GSTT1 Polymorphisms, Smoking, and Lung Cancer Risk in a Pooled Analysis among Asian Populations
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2008; 17(5): 1120 - 1126.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
C. Carlsten, G. S. Sagoo, A. J. Frodsham, W. Burke, and J. P. T. Higgins
Glutathione S-Transferase M1 (GSTM1) Polymorphisms and Lung Cancer: A Literature-based Systematic HuGE Review and Meta-Analysis
Am. J. Epidemiol., April 1, 2008; 167(7): 759 - 774.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
A. Rossini, D.C.M. Rapozo, S.C. Soares Lima, D.P. Guimaraes, M.A. Ferreira, R. Teixeira, C.D.P. Kruel, S.G.S. Barros, N.A. Andreollo, R. Acatauassu, et al.
Polymorphisms of GSTP1 and GSTT1, but not of CYP2A6, CYP2E1 or GSTM1, modify the risk for esophageal cancer in a western population
Carcinogenesis, December 1, 2007; 28(12): 2537 - 2542.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
P. Vineis, S. Anttila, S. Benhamou, M. Spinola, A. Hirvonen, C. Kiyohara, S. J. Garte, R. Puntoni, A. Rannug, R. C. Strange, et al.
Evidence of gene gene interactions in lung carcinogenesis in a large pooled analysis
Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2007; 28(9): 1902 - 1905.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
RE: "META- AND POOLED ANALYSIS OF GSTT1 AND LUNG CANCER: A HUGE-GSEC REVIEW"
Am. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2007; 166(3): 366 - 366.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
N. S. Weiss
RE: "META- AND POOLED ANALYSIS OF GSTT1 AND LUNG CANCER: A HuGE-GSEC REVIEW"
Am. J. Epidemiol., June 15, 2007; 165(12): 1462 - 1462.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
E. Taioli
AN AUTHOR REPLIES
Am. J. Epidemiol., June 15, 2007; 165(12): 1462 - 1463.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow An erratum has been published
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
164/11/1027    most recent
kwj321v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (34)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Raimondi, S
Right arrow Articles by Taioli, E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Raimondi, S
Right arrow Articles by Taioli, E
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?