07.01.2014 Views

LIFE09200604007 Tabish - Homi Bhabha National Institute

LIFE09200604007 Tabish - Homi Bhabha National Institute

LIFE09200604007 Tabish - Homi Bhabha National Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Synopsis<br />

and develop a correlation. We genotyped 22 SNPs in 17 genes falling in important<br />

carcinogenesis pathways viz. carcinogen metabolism, DNA damage/repair, cell cycle<br />

regulation and apoptosis. To understand genotyping data we calculated a consolidated<br />

G Score on the basis of whether the subject had homozygous variant, heterozygous or<br />

homozygous wildtype form of a gene. A high G Score designated more number of risk<br />

alleles in an individual. Our assumption was that individuals with a high G Score might<br />

have a higher probability of MPN development as compared to those with the low G<br />

Score. Hence a higher G Score indicated magnitude of cancer predisposing genotype.<br />

A total G Score with all 22 SNPs, G Score of only DNA repair genes and G<br />

Score of MPN risk association signature, which included SNPs in genes that could<br />

predict the outcome of tobacco related MPN in our previous study 8 , was calculated and<br />

was found to be higher in MPN patient group as compared to control group. Although<br />

total G Score was not statistically significant between the two groups at the 5% level<br />

(p=0.12), G Score of DNA repair genes and MPN risk association signature was<br />

statistically significant, indicating that indeed there existed inter-individual difference<br />

at genetic level between MPN patients and controls at least in a subset of important<br />

genes falling in carcinogenesis pathways. A comparison of total G Score in all 22<br />

SNPs, G Score of DNA repair genes and MPN risk association signature showed a<br />

negative correlation with percent cell death and percent G2 delay. This correlation was<br />

statistically significant for most of the groups. While a positive correlation was<br />

observed between G Score (all three groups) and percent H2AX positive cells at 4 h<br />

time point, although it was not significant.<br />

Our findings emphasize the importance of assessing the collective effects of a<br />

panel of polymorphisms in modulating phenotypic effects after genotoxic exposure.<br />

The genotype-phenotype correlation observed in this study supports our hypothesis that<br />

variations in important genes may alter phenotypic response and may contribute to<br />

UADT MPN risk. In the present state for understanding UADT MPN pathogenesis it is<br />

important to find association between multiple genetic combinations and cancer risks,<br />

which may otherwise remain undetectable in single SNP analysis.<br />

In summary our results clearly suggest that extent of DNA repair, percent cell<br />

death and cell cycle delay might be potentially useful in identifying susceptibility to<br />

UADT MPN. It also demonstrates that identifying distinctive polymorphism based G<br />

Score signature can differentiate the study participants into two separate subsets, and its<br />

correlation with various phenotypic effects (indicating a gene-environment interaction)<br />

17

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!