Background: Altered expression of a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin motifs 5 (ADAMTS5) is observed in hepatocellular carcinoma. The genetic polymorphisms of this gene in aflatoxin B1 (AFB1)–related hepatocellular carcinoma have not yet been elucidated.

Methods: We conducted a hospital-based case–control study, including 1,706 hepatocellular carcinoma cases and 2,270 controls without any liver diseases or tumors, to assess the association between 74 polymorphisms in ADAMTS5 and AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk and prognosis. Genotype, mRNA levels, and TP53 gene mutation (TP53M) related to AFB1 exposure were tested using TaqMan-PCR or sequencing technique. ADAMTS5 protein level and microvessel density were analyzed by IHC.

Results: Among these 74 polymorphisms, only rs2830581 affected hepatocellular carcinoma risk. Compared with the homozygote of rs2830581 G alleles (rs2830581-GG), the genotypes of rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-GA or -AA) increased hepatocellular carcinoma risk (OR: 1.85 and 4.40; 95% CI: 1.57–2.19 and 3.43–5.64, respectively). Significant interactive effects between risk genotypes and AFB1 exposure status were also observed in the joint effects analysis. Furthermore, the rs2830581 polymorphism modified the tumor recurrence-free survival and overall survival of patients. This polymorphism not only affected pathologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma such as tumor dedifferentiation and microvessel density, but also modified ADAMTS5 expression and the effects of transarterial chemoembolization treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma.

Conclusions: These results suggest ADAMTS5 polymorphisms may be risk and prognostic biomarkers of AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma, and rs2830581 is a potential candidate.

Impact: Our findings support the hypothesis that ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism modifies AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk and prognosis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(2); 334–43. ©2015 AACR.

Hepatocellular carcinoma, in addition to being the most common cancer worldwide in 2008, is the most common histopathologic type of liver cancer (1). Approximately 50% all hepatocellular carcinoma cases and deaths were estimated to occur in the People's Republic of China (especially in the southeast areas such as Guangxi), mainly because of high aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) exposure and/or chronic infection of hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV and HCV, respectively; ref. 2). Therefore, a better understanding of the molecular characteristics and underlying mechanism are of the utmost importance and may prove useful in developing novel strategies for the prevention, early detection, treatment, and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. The hotspot mutation of the TP53 gene (TP53M) has been shown to be positively associated with AFB1 exposure levels and hepatocellular carcinoma risk factor (2, 3). Until now, it has been regarded as an important biomarker of AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma as well as the serum AFB1 albumin adducts (AAA; refs. 2, 3). Recently, increasing evidence has shown potential associations of common genetic variants with AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk in biologically plausible pathways including DNA repair and detoxication pathways (4). These genetic factors could feasibly be utilized as biomarkers of hepatocellular carcinoma induced by AFB1 exposure and prognostic indicators.

The disintegrin-like and metalloproteinase (ADAMTS) family member ADAMTS5 acts as a proteoglycanase and has been shown to be a major aggrecanase in cartilage destruction (5, 6). Recently, a preponderance of evidence has implicated aberrant ADAMTS5 expression in the development and progression of some tumors including breast cancer, colorectal cancer, glioblastoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (7–18). Despite the collected data, the association of altered ADAMTS5 expression and genetic variants of AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma remains to be elucidated. Here, we evaluated whether 74 SNPs in this gene modify AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk and prognosis.

Study subjects

We utilized a hospital-based case–control study of AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma in the Guangxi area according to a previously described protocol (19, 20). Briefly, patients diagnosed with histopathologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma in hospitals affiliated with Guangxi Medical University and Youjiang Medical College for Nationalities in the Southwestern Guangxi from January 2004 to July 2014 were utilized. Individuals without clinical evidence of hepatic disease or tumors were recruited from the general health check-up center at the same hospitals during the same period for comparison. To control the effects of confounders, cases were individually matched (1:1 or 1:2) to controls based on gender, ethnicity (Han, Zhuang), age (±5 years), and HBV and HCV infection. All controls were surveyed to ascertain their willingness to participate in the study and to provide preliminary demographic data. In this study, a total of 1,706 cases and 2,076 controls, representing 95% of eligible cases and 98% of eligible controls were interviewed and included the final analysis. From these subjects, 200 matched cases and controls were randomly selected for inclusion in the screening set, whereas the remainder was utilized for the validation group. Once informed, written consent was obtained for all participants and 4 mL of peripheral blood was collected along with demographic data. Surgically removed tumor samples and 207 fresh cancer tissue specimens were collected for ADAMTS5 expression analysis. All protocols were approved by the ethic committees of the participating hospitals and more detailed data collection can be found in the Supplementary Materials and Methods.

AFB1 exposure analysis

In this study, subject AFB1 exposure level was evaluated via the serum AAA levels using a comparative ELISA (21). For statistical analysis, AAA values were logarithmically transformed and then were divided into three subgroups: low (<2.18 ln fmol/mg), medium (2.18–2.98 ln fmol/mg), and high (>2.98 ln fmol/mg), according to the mean logit value of serum AAA among controls and cases. These three subgroups represented low, medium, and high AFB1 exposure, respectively.

Mutation of TP53M at codon 249 of the TP53 gene was examined using the TaqMan-PCR methods (21) to assess the relationship between AFB1 exposure and hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis. Briefly, Genomic DNA was isolated from cancerous tissues using FFPE DNA Kit (catalog # CW0547) by Cowin Biotech Co., Ltd. Each PCR was carried out in a total volume of 25 μL consisting of 1 × Premix Ex Taq [catalog # DRR039A, TaKaRa Biotechnology (Dalian) Co., Ltd.], 0.2 μmol/L of each probe, 0.2 μmol/L of each primer, and 50 to 100 ng of genomic DNA. The PCR program had an initial denaturation step of 2 minutes at 95°C followed by 50 cycles of 10 seconds at 95°C and 1 minute at 60°C. For quality control, controls were included in each run, and repeated genotyping and sequencing of a random 10% subset yielded 100% identical genotypes. In this study, TP53M positive was defined as the TP53 genotypes with mutant codon 249 alleles.

ADAMTS5 SNP selection and analysis

Utilizing the application programming interface tools available from the ENSEMBL database, 1,143 SNPs in the ADAMTS5 gene were obtained. According to the criteria of minor allele frequency of more than 0.10 in Asians, 74 SNPs were selected for further analysis in the first stage of the study (Supplementary Table S1). Genotyping was performed by using the SNaPshot method. In the second stage of the study, four SNPs (rs2830581, rs162499, rs233895, and rs62215997) were further analyzed using the TaqMan-PCR method. More detailed information for SNPs selection and analysis is available in the Supplementary Materials and Methods.

ADAMTS5 expression analysis

ADAMTS5 expression levels were evaluated using both ADAMTS5 mRNA-expressing levels and protein-expressing levels. Detailed information about ADAMTS5 expression analysis is described in the Supplementary Materials and Methods.

Statistical analysis

We used the Student t test, the Mann–Whitney U test, or the χ2 test to evaluate the differences between groups, demographic characteristics, AFB1-exposure information, and SNP genotypes. From the individually matched design, conditional logistical regression was conducted (with multivariate factors including known causes of hepatocellular carcinoma among Guangxi population) to estimate ORs for hepatocellular carcinoma along with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Screening the main effects of the 74 SNPs utilized was based on the additive model with the genotypes treated as ordinal variables. For the correction of multiple testing in the screen stage, the Bonferroni correction treats each SNP test as an independent test. This correction is overly conservative for SNPs that are in the linkage disequilibrium (LD), because it ignores the correlation among SNPs. To address this limitation, the correlation matrix-based method was used to take into account LD between SNPs (22). On the basis of this method, two-sided P values smaller than 6.74 × 10−4 were considered significant for the main effects of SNPs in the screen stage. In the joint analysis stage of SNPs and AFB1 exposure, genotype frequencies in these groups were further adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni method, and the significance threshold was lowered to αcorrect = 3.37 × 10−4.

Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with the log-rank test was used to evaluate the effects of rs2830581 polymorphism on hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis. Risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis were selected using the Cox multivariate regression model (including all possible multiplicatively interactive variables) with stepwise forward selection based on a likelihood ratio test. HRs and 95% CIs for risk factors were then calculated from a multivariate Cox regression model. All statistical analyses were carried out utilizing the SPSS version 18 (SPSS Institute).

Characteristics of subjects

The distributions of demographic characteristics (including sex, age, race, and HBV and HCV status) between hepatocellular carcinoma cases and controls were not significantly different. However, hepatocellular carcinoma cases exhibited a higher level of AFB1-album adducts in the peripheral serum than controls (2.98 vs. 2.18 ln fmol/mg, P = 1.81 × 10−177). Logistic regression analysis revealed that hepatocellular carcinoma risk increased with an increasing exposure level (OR, 1.89–5.88; P < 0.01; Supplementary Table S2). However, there was not a significant difference of AFB1 levels between the early stage and the advanced stage patients (2.99 ± 0.98 vs. 2.97 ± 0.75 ln fmol/mg, P = 0.61).

Effects of ADAMTS5 polymorphisms on hepatocellular carcinoma risk

Analysis of the selected SNPs revealed the genotype distribution of control individuals was consistent with predictions from the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (Supplementary Table S3; P > 0.05). Logistic regression analysis indicated that four SNPs (rs162499, rs233895, rs62215997, and rs2830581) were significant upon initial screening (Table 1, Supplementary Table S4). From the validation group, it was found that only rs2830581 (located on the 3′ UTR of the ADAMTS5 gene) was significantly associated with hepatocellular carcinoma risk (OR = 2.35; 95% CI, 2.03–2.72; P = 3.38 × 10−31). In the combined analysis utilizing all subjects (Merged set, Table 1), the adjusted OR for hepatocellular carcinoma among those heterozygous for rs2830581 G and A alleles (rs2830581-GA) versus those homozygous for rs2830581 G alleles (rs2830581-GG) was 1.85 (1.57–2.19). The corresponding OR for those homozygous for rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-AA) was 4.40 (3.43–5.64). Thus, hepatocellular carcinoma risk was associated with the number of rs2830581 A alleles.

Table 1.

ADAMTS5 polymorphisms and hepatocellular carcinoma risk

Screening setValidation setMerged set
ADAMTS5Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)
Rs162499-AA 128 86 Reference 1,328 965 Reference 1,456 1,051 Reference 
 AG 63 88 2.09 (1.37–3.20/6.51 × 10−4653 474 1.00 (0.87–1.16/0.99) 716 562 1.07 (0.93–1.24/0.35) 
 GG 26 4.29 (1.92–9.62/4.01 × 10−489 67 1.04 (0.75–1.44/0.84) 98 93 1.32 (0.96–1.81/0.08) 
 AG/GG 72 114 2.37 (1.58–3.54/2.75 × 10−5742 541 1.00 (0.87–1.15/0.96) 814 655 1.10 (0.96–1.27/0.17) 
Rs233895-CC 135 99 Reference 1,398 1,021 Reference 1,533 1,120 Reference 
 CT 57 80 1.91 (1.25–2.94/2.95 × 10−3589 402 0.94 (0.80–1.09/0.38) 646 482 1.00 (0.86–1.16/0.98) 
 TT 21 3.52 (1.50–8.28/3.98 × 10−383 83 1.37 (1.00–1.88/0.04) 91 104 1.59 (1.17–2.17/3.34 × 10−3
 CT/TT 65 101 2.11 (1.41–3.17/3.07 × 10−4672 485 0.99 (0.86–1.14/0.88) 737 586 1.07 (0.93–1.23/0.35) 
Rs62215997-AA 153 121 Reference 1,582 1,153 Reference 1,735 1,274 Reference 
 AG 38 56 1.88 (1.16–3.02/9.94 × 10−3390 230 0.81 (0.68–0.97/0.02) 428 286 0.91 (0.77–1.08/0.27) 
 GG 23 3.25 (1.45–7.30/4.21 × 10−398 123 1.72 (1.31–2.67/1.17 × 10−15107 146 1.86 (1.43–2.41/2.86 × 10−6
 AG/GG 47 79 2.14 (1.39–3.30/5.86 × 10−4488 353 0.99 (0.85–1.16/0.92) 535 432 1.10 (0.95–1.27/0.20) 
Rs2030581-GG 154 115 Reference 1,584 875 Reference 1,738 990 Reference 
 GA 36 52 1.92 (1.18–3.13/8.93 × 10−3383 406 1.92 (1.63–2.56/3.24 × 10−15419 458 1.85 (1.57–2.19/1.88 × 10−13
 AA 10 33 4.40 (2.08–9.30/1.04 × 10−4103 225 3.96 (3.09–5.07/1.17 × 10−27113 258 4.40 (3.43–5.64/1.13 × 10−31
 GA/AA 46 85 2.46 (1.60–3.79/4.61 × 10−5486 631 2.35 (2.03–2.72/3.38 × 10−31532 716 2.37 (2.05–2.74/4.42 × 10−31
Screening setValidation setMerged set
ADAMTS5Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)Controls (n)HCCs (n)OR (95% CI/Ptrend)
Rs162499-AA 128 86 Reference 1,328 965 Reference 1,456 1,051 Reference 
 AG 63 88 2.09 (1.37–3.20/6.51 × 10−4653 474 1.00 (0.87–1.16/0.99) 716 562 1.07 (0.93–1.24/0.35) 
 GG 26 4.29 (1.92–9.62/4.01 × 10−489 67 1.04 (0.75–1.44/0.84) 98 93 1.32 (0.96–1.81/0.08) 
 AG/GG 72 114 2.37 (1.58–3.54/2.75 × 10−5742 541 1.00 (0.87–1.15/0.96) 814 655 1.10 (0.96–1.27/0.17) 
Rs233895-CC 135 99 Reference 1,398 1,021 Reference 1,533 1,120 Reference 
 CT 57 80 1.91 (1.25–2.94/2.95 × 10−3589 402 0.94 (0.80–1.09/0.38) 646 482 1.00 (0.86–1.16/0.98) 
 TT 21 3.52 (1.50–8.28/3.98 × 10−383 83 1.37 (1.00–1.88/0.04) 91 104 1.59 (1.17–2.17/3.34 × 10−3
 CT/TT 65 101 2.11 (1.41–3.17/3.07 × 10−4672 485 0.99 (0.86–1.14/0.88) 737 586 1.07 (0.93–1.23/0.35) 
Rs62215997-AA 153 121 Reference 1,582 1,153 Reference 1,735 1,274 Reference 
 AG 38 56 1.88 (1.16–3.02/9.94 × 10−3390 230 0.81 (0.68–0.97/0.02) 428 286 0.91 (0.77–1.08/0.27) 
 GG 23 3.25 (1.45–7.30/4.21 × 10−398 123 1.72 (1.31–2.67/1.17 × 10−15107 146 1.86 (1.43–2.41/2.86 × 10−6
 AG/GG 47 79 2.14 (1.39–3.30/5.86 × 10−4488 353 0.99 (0.85–1.16/0.92) 535 432 1.10 (0.95–1.27/0.20) 
Rs2030581-GG 154 115 Reference 1,584 875 Reference 1,738 990 Reference 
 GA 36 52 1.92 (1.18–3.13/8.93 × 10−3383 406 1.92 (1.63–2.56/3.24 × 10−15419 458 1.85 (1.57–2.19/1.88 × 10−13
 AA 10 33 4.40 (2.08–9.30/1.04 × 10−4103 225 3.96 (3.09–5.07/1.17 × 10−27113 258 4.40 (3.43–5.64/1.13 × 10−31
 GA/AA 46 85 2.46 (1.60–3.79/4.61 × 10−5486 631 2.35 (2.03–2.72/3.38 × 10−31532 716 2.37 (2.05–2.74/4.42 × 10−31

To evaluate possible interactive effects of individually matching variables (including age, race, gender, HBV infection, and HCV infection) and ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism on hepatocellular carcinoma risk, the polymorphism analysis was stratified by matching factors. Results showed that these factors did not substantially modulate the effect of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 on cancer risk (Pinteraction > 0.05; Supplementary Table S5).

Joint effects of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism and AFB1 exposure on hepatocellular carcinoma risk

The joint effects of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism and AFB1 exposure levels on hepatocellular carcinoma risk was carried out with the lowest risk group (those with rs2830581-GG and low level of AFB1 exposure) as a reference (Table 2). It was found that higher levels of AFB1 exposure consistently increased hepatocellular carcinoma risk; the risk was more pronounced among subjects with ADAMTS5 risk genotypes. There was evidence of multiplicatively interactive effects of genotypes and exposure levels on hepatocellular carcinoma risk [16.67 > (1.88 × 3.97)] according to the previously published formula [OReg > (OReg′ × ORe′g); ref. 23]. To determine more detailed interactive value, we conducted multiplicatively interactive analysis. In this analysis model, risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma risk were selected using a multivariate logistic regression model (including all possible multiplicatively interactive variables) with stepwise forward selection based on a likelihood ratio test. Next, the ORinteraction and 95% CIs for AFB1–genotype interactive variables were calculated in the same multivariate model (simultaneously including all risk variables and multiplicatively interactive variables). We found significantly interactive values [ORinteraction (95% CI/P), 1.63 (1.08–2.46/0.02) for high AFB1 exposure level × rs2830581-GA; 4.37 (1.76–10.86/1.48 × 10−3) for high AFB1 exposure level × rs2830581-AA, respectively]. Together, the data indicated that AFB1 exposure multiplicatively interacted with ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism.

Table 2.

Joint effects of AFB1 exposure and ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism on HCC risk

AFB1 exposure level/ADAMTS5 genotypeControls (n = 2,270)n (%)Cases (n = 1,706)n (%)OR (95% CI)Ptrend
Low/GG 908 (40.0) 269 (15.8) Reference  
 GA 216 (9.5) 98 (5.7) 1.52 (1.16–2.00) 2.76 × 10−3 
 AAb 72 (3.2) 63 (3.7) 2.98 (2.07–4.30) 4.48 × 10−9 
 GA/AA 288 (12.7) 161 (9.4) 1.88 (1.49–2.39) 1.47 × 10−7 
Medium/GG 512 (22.6) 258 (15.1) 1.72 (1.40–2.10) 1.76 × 10−7 
 GA 137 (6.0) 121 (7.1) 3.01 (2.28–3.99) 1.28 × 10−14 
 AA 35 (1.5) 82 (4.8) 7.91 (5.20–12.02) 3.82 × 10−22 
 GA/AA 172 (7.6) 203 (11.9) 4.01 (3.14–5.12) 1.04 × 10−28 
High/GG 318 (14.0) 463 (27.1) 4.97 (4.07–6.05) 1.27 × 10−56 
 GA 66 (2.9) 239 (14.0) 12.33 (9.08–16.73) 1.73 × 10−58 
 AA 6 (0.3) 113 (6.6) 64.56 (28.07–148.49) 1.05 × 10−22 
 GA/AA 72 (3.2) 352 (20.6) 16.67 (12.50–22.25) 1.86 × 10−81 
AFB1 exposure level/ADAMTS5 genotypeControls (n = 2,270)n (%)Cases (n = 1,706)n (%)OR (95% CI)Ptrend
Low/GG 908 (40.0) 269 (15.8) Reference  
 GA 216 (9.5) 98 (5.7) 1.52 (1.16–2.00) 2.76 × 10−3 
 AAb 72 (3.2) 63 (3.7) 2.98 (2.07–4.30) 4.48 × 10−9 
 GA/AA 288 (12.7) 161 (9.4) 1.88 (1.49–2.39) 1.47 × 10−7 
Medium/GG 512 (22.6) 258 (15.1) 1.72 (1.40–2.10) 1.76 × 10−7 
 GA 137 (6.0) 121 (7.1) 3.01 (2.28–3.99) 1.28 × 10−14 
 AA 35 (1.5) 82 (4.8) 7.91 (5.20–12.02) 3.82 × 10−22 
 GA/AA 172 (7.6) 203 (11.9) 4.01 (3.14–5.12) 1.04 × 10−28 
High/GG 318 (14.0) 463 (27.1) 4.97 (4.07–6.05) 1.27 × 10−56 
 GA 66 (2.9) 239 (14.0) 12.33 (9.08–16.73) 1.73 × 10−58 
 AA 6 (0.3) 113 (6.6) 64.56 (28.07–148.49) 1.05 × 10−22 
 GA/AA 72 (3.2) 352 (20.6) 16.67 (12.50–22.25) 1.86 × 10−81 

ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism modified ADAMTS5 expression

To characterize the functional relevance of the ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism, we conducted a correlation analysis between the rs2830581 genotypes and the expression of ADAMTS5 protein assessed using IHC on the cancerous tissues collected in the study. The results showed that the genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles were significantly related to decreased ADAMTS5 expression in hepatocellular tumor tissues, compared with rs2830581-GG (Fig. 1A; P < 0.01). To analyze this correlation further, subjects were divided into three groups based on ADAMTS5 expression scores in the tumors, representing low, medium, and high expression of ADAMTS5. ADAMTS5 expression was found to be negatively related to the expression of the polymorphism (r = −0.313; Supplementary Table S6; Fig. 1B). Moreover, mRNA levels of ADAMTS5 in cancerous tissues with rs2830581-GA or -AA were significantly lower than in those with rs2830581-GG (P < 0.01; Fig. 1C). Together, these results suggest that this polymorphism modulates the expression of ADAMTS5.

Figure 1.

ADMATS5 rs2830581 polymorphism correlated with ADAMTS5 expression and pathologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A, ADAMTS5 protein expression was evaluated using the IHC scores of IRS system according to the following formula: IRS = SI × PP, as described elsewhere. ADAMTS5 expression scores are shown as box plots, with horizontal lines representing the median, the bottom and the top of the boxes representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. We compared genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-GA and rs2830581-AA) with rs2830581-GG using the Mann–Whitney U test. B, representative images show that different expression levels were observed in cancerous tissues from cases with different ADAMTS5 genotypes (scale bars: 50 μm). C, qRT-PCR analysis of ADAMTS5 mRNA level in hepatocellular carcinoma tumor tissues from 207 subjects. The relative expression of ADAMTS5 mRNA is shown as box plots, with horizontal lines representing the median, the bottom and the top of the boxes representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively, and vertical bars representing the range of data. We compared the difference among group using the Mann–Whitney U test. Any outliers are marked with a circle and extreme cases are marked with an asterisk. D and E, the microvessel density (MVD) and percentage of portal vein tumor (PVT)-positive tumors in three groups with different genotypes of rs2830581 from 1,706 subjects. Data were analyzed using Pearson χ2 test.

Figure 1.

ADMATS5 rs2830581 polymorphism correlated with ADAMTS5 expression and pathologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A, ADAMTS5 protein expression was evaluated using the IHC scores of IRS system according to the following formula: IRS = SI × PP, as described elsewhere. ADAMTS5 expression scores are shown as box plots, with horizontal lines representing the median, the bottom and the top of the boxes representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. We compared genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-GA and rs2830581-AA) with rs2830581-GG using the Mann–Whitney U test. B, representative images show that different expression levels were observed in cancerous tissues from cases with different ADAMTS5 genotypes (scale bars: 50 μm). C, qRT-PCR analysis of ADAMTS5 mRNA level in hepatocellular carcinoma tumor tissues from 207 subjects. The relative expression of ADAMTS5 mRNA is shown as box plots, with horizontal lines representing the median, the bottom and the top of the boxes representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively, and vertical bars representing the range of data. We compared the difference among group using the Mann–Whitney U test. Any outliers are marked with a circle and extreme cases are marked with an asterisk. D and E, the microvessel density (MVD) and percentage of portal vein tumor (PVT)-positive tumors in three groups with different genotypes of rs2830581 from 1,706 subjects. Data were analyzed using Pearson χ2 test.

Close modal

ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism correlated with microvessel density

From previous reports, it is known that ADAMTS5 expression is capable of regulating hepatocellular carcinoma angiogenesis (14). Thus, we explored how expression of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism affected MVD (Fig. 1D). The data showed that rs2830581-GA or -AA had a higher frequency of MVD, compared with rs2830581-GG [OR (95% CI/P), 2.50 (1.98–3.16/1.65 × 10−14) for rs2830581-GA and 7.29 (5.09–10.43/2.33 × 10−27) for rs2830581-AA, respectively]. Moreover, these risk-associated genotypes increased the risk of portal vein tumor [PVT; OR = 2.14 (1.65–2.79) and 5.74 (3.64–9.06) for rs2830581-GA and -AA, respectively; Fig. 1E].

ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism modified hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis

To study the effects of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism on the outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma patients, survival follow-up information of all hepatocellular carcinoma patients was analyzed. The association analysis between high-risk genotypes (namely, genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles; rs2830581-GA/AA) or low/no-risk genotypes (rs2830581-GG) and the pathologic characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma were performed separately (Supplementary Table S7). A significant difference between genotypes among different AFB1 exposure levels, tumor size, tumor grade and TNM stage, and PVT and TP53M status, but not in age, gender, race, HBsAg, anti-HCV, or cirrhosis was observed. Results of the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that ADAMTS5 polymorphism significantly correlated with shorter overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of hepatocellular carcinoma cases (Fig. 2A and B), particularly under conditions of high aflatoxin exposure (Fig. 2C–H). From Cox regression analysis (Table 3) we showed that the ADAMTS5 polymorphism is capable of affecting hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis (rs2830581-AA risk value, HR = 3.57 for RFS and 2.18 for OS, respectively). Furthermore, some evidence of multiplicative interaction was found for rs2830581 polymorphism and AFB1 exposure (Pinteraction < 0.05). Taken together, these results indicated that this polymorphism is independent of other clinical covariates and suggested its potential as an independent prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Figure 2.

The association between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis and both AFB1 exposure and ADMATS5 rs2830581 polymorphism in 1,706 hepatocellular carcinoma patients. A and B, the genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-GA and -AA) were found to have a poorer overall survival (OS) or tumor recurrence-free survival (RFS) than rs2830581-GG. C–H, the joint effects of AFB1 exposure and rs2830581 polymorphism further modified hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis. Cumulative hazard function was plotted by Kaplan–Meier's methodology, and P value was calculated with two-sided log-rank tests. MST, the median overall survival time; MRT, the median tumor recurrence-free survival time.

Figure 2.

The association between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis and both AFB1 exposure and ADMATS5 rs2830581 polymorphism in 1,706 hepatocellular carcinoma patients. A and B, the genotypes with rs2830581 A alleles (rs2830581-GA and -AA) were found to have a poorer overall survival (OS) or tumor recurrence-free survival (RFS) than rs2830581-GG. C–H, the joint effects of AFB1 exposure and rs2830581 polymorphism further modified hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis. Cumulative hazard function was plotted by Kaplan–Meier's methodology, and P value was calculated with two-sided log-rank tests. MST, the median overall survival time; MRT, the median tumor recurrence-free survival time.

Close modal
Table 3.

Cox proportional hazard model analysis for multivariate analysis of potential predictor factors for HCC cases

VariableHR (95% CI/P) for RFSHR (95% CI/P) for OS
Tumor size 
 ≤3 cm Reference Reference 
 >3 cm 1.41 (1.20–1.66/2.19 × 10−51.66 (1.32–1.85/2.42 × 10−6
TNM stage 
 I–II Reference Reference 
 III–IV 2.84 (2.34–2.99/1.41 × 10−532.32 (1.73–3.10/1.49 × 10−8
MVD 
 Negative Reference Reference 
 Positive 5.21 (4.38–6.19/1.22 × 10−774.31 (3.83–4.86/8.03 × 10−126
Curative treatment 
 Yes Reference Reference 
 No 3.13 (2.33–4.19/2.08 × 10−142.11 (1.86–2.39/1.90 × 10−31
AFB1-exposure levels 
 Low Reference Reference 
 Median 1.31 (1.00–1.71/0.04) 1.34 (1.16–1.55/8.19 × 10−5
 High 3.18 (2.53–3.99/2.49 × 10−231.61 (1.42–1.84/6.77 × 10−13
ADAMTS5 rs2830581 genotypes 
 GG Reference Reference 
 GA 1.71 (1.37–2.15/2.62 × 10−61.40 (1.24–1.58/8.78 × 10−8
 AA 3.57 (2.83–4.49/2.59 × 10−272.18 (1.88–1.52/2.76 × 10−25
Interaction of ADAMTS5 and AFB1 exposure 
 AA × high exposure 2.20 (1.27–3.83/4.91 × 10−31.61 (1.17–2.20/3.15 × 10−3
VariableHR (95% CI/P) for RFSHR (95% CI/P) for OS
Tumor size 
 ≤3 cm Reference Reference 
 >3 cm 1.41 (1.20–1.66/2.19 × 10−51.66 (1.32–1.85/2.42 × 10−6
TNM stage 
 I–II Reference Reference 
 III–IV 2.84 (2.34–2.99/1.41 × 10−532.32 (1.73–3.10/1.49 × 10−8
MVD 
 Negative Reference Reference 
 Positive 5.21 (4.38–6.19/1.22 × 10−774.31 (3.83–4.86/8.03 × 10−126
Curative treatment 
 Yes Reference Reference 
 No 3.13 (2.33–4.19/2.08 × 10−142.11 (1.86–2.39/1.90 × 10−31
AFB1-exposure levels 
 Low Reference Reference 
 Median 1.31 (1.00–1.71/0.04) 1.34 (1.16–1.55/8.19 × 10−5
 High 3.18 (2.53–3.99/2.49 × 10−231.61 (1.42–1.84/6.77 × 10−13
ADAMTS5 rs2830581 genotypes 
 GG Reference Reference 
 GA 1.71 (1.37–2.15/2.62 × 10−61.40 (1.24–1.58/8.78 × 10−8
 AA 3.57 (2.83–4.49/2.59 × 10−272.18 (1.88–1.52/2.76 × 10−25
Interaction of ADAMTS5 and AFB1 exposure 
 AA × high exposure 2.20 (1.27–3.83/4.91 × 10−31.61 (1.17–2.20/3.15 × 10−3

ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism modified the effects of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma

The effect on patient survival in ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism was investigated to determine whether there was a correlation with effectiveness of a chosen therapy. Information from TACE-treated hepatocellular carcinoma patients who received curative resection treatment (Supplementary Table S8) was collected in accordance with the Chinese Manage Criteria of hepatocellular carcinoma (24). Although TACE treatment improved hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis as a whole (Fig. 3A and B, Supplementary Fig. S1A and S1B), stratified analysis based on the different genotypes of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 revealed that TACE treatment had no effect on the RFS and OS of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with rs2830581-AA genotype (Fig. 3C and D, Supplementary Fig. S1C and S1D). Interestingly, patients with rs2830581-GA or -GG polymorphisms that received TACE treatment had a prolonged OS and RFS (Fig. 3E–H, Supplementary Fig. S1E–S1H). By using these with rs2830581-AA but not receiving TACE treatment as a reference, a joint statistical analysis between ADAMTS5 genotypes and TACE treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis was performed (Supplementary Fig. S2A–S2D). The results indicated that hepatocellular carcinoma cases with rs2830581-GG would face a noticeably decreased risk of death and tumor reoccurrence under the conditions of TACE treatment (OS: HR = 0.28, 95% CI, 0.22–0.36; RFS: HR = 0.17, 95% CI, 0.12–0.24). Taken together, the data suggest that ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism could potentially modify the effects of TACE treatment and improve the prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

Figure 3.

The different therapeutic value of TACE on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases in three groups with different genotypes of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 from 1,299 subjects. A and B, TACE treatment was found to improve overall survival (OS) or tumor recurrence-free survival (RFS). C–H, the effects of TACE treatment on hepatocellular carcinomas' OS and RFS within strata of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 genotypes. Cumulative hazard function was plotted by Kaplan–Meier's methodology, and P value was calculated with two-sided log-rank tests. MST, the median overall survival time; MRT, the median tumor recurrence-free survival time.

Figure 3.

The different therapeutic value of TACE on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases in three groups with different genotypes of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 from 1,299 subjects. A and B, TACE treatment was found to improve overall survival (OS) or tumor recurrence-free survival (RFS). C–H, the effects of TACE treatment on hepatocellular carcinomas' OS and RFS within strata of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 genotypes. Cumulative hazard function was plotted by Kaplan–Meier's methodology, and P value was calculated with two-sided log-rank tests. MST, the median overall survival time; MRT, the median tumor recurrence-free survival time.

Close modal

On the basis of a large-scale case–control study, we investigated the association between ADAMTS5 polymorphisms and the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in a high AFB1 exposure area of Guangxi province. It was found that the genotypes of ADAMTS5 with rs2830581 A alleles had a substantial association with the increasing risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 2.05–2.74). Interestingly, an interaction between genotype and environment was found for populations having the rs2830581 A alleles, and exposed to different levels of AFB1. This study represents the first report indicating the potential of ADAMTS5 polymorphisms as biomarkers and prognostic indicators of hepatocellular carcinoma. In addition, we report that these polymorphisms alter the effects of TACE treatment as well.

ADAMTS5 is well known for its role in cartilage biology (1, 25), and that it is the major aggrecanase in mouse cartilage in an inflammation model of arthritis (26). Previously, studies have suggested that ADAMTS5 may be involved in the development and progression of cancers affecting the breast, prostate, brain, colorectal tissue, and liver (10, 14, 16, 27–29). Porter and colleagues (27) found that ADAMTS5 expression in breast cancer tissues was downregulated in cancerous tissues with respect to nonneoplastic mammary tissue, irrespective of the heterogeneity of the samples and the tumor type or grade. Kim and Roman-Gomez (10, 16) observed that the ADAMTS5 gene exhibited hypermethylation in colorectal cancer and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Additional studies have indicated that it may be possible for this gene to suppress tumor growth and progress (9, 14, 16). In contrast, other reports indicated that ADAMTS5 expression was upregulated in human glioblastoma compared with normal brain tissues and promoted glioma cell invasiveness in culture (28). Together, the collected data indicate that ADAMTS5 may serve different functions in different cancer types. Thus, the role of ADAMTS5 in cancer, including hepatocellular carcinoma, needs to be further evaluated.

More than 1,000 SNPs have been reported in the ADAMTS5 gene, some of which were found in correlation with human disease (11, 13, 17, 18). In the current study, 74 known SNPs were analyzed because of their indicated involvement with the structure and expression of ADAMTS5, and potential involvement in hepatocellular carcinoma carcinogenesis (13). Of the polymorphisms analyzed, only rs2830581 polymorphism (located in the 3′ UTR of ADAMTS5) was found to be associated with increased hepatocellular carcinoma risk from first stage screening and second stage validation. Furthermore, this polymorphism was found in correlation with AFB1 exposure status in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. These data suggest this polymorphism may be an important genetic susceptibility factor in cancer risk. Coincidentally, a previous case–control study from Chongqing Region, a non-AFB1 exposure area in China, has shown that rs2830585 modifies hepatocellular carcinoma risk. Supplementary the aforementioned modifying role, the data indicated that the polymorphism affected hepatocellular carcinoma risk in the first-stage screening analysis, despite a lack of statistical significance. Therefore, the possibility that the genetic polymorphisms in ADAMTS5 influence hepatocellular carcinoma risk through an alternative pathway should not be ignored.

To explore the effect of ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism on AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk, expression of ADAMTS5 and the pathologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma were examined. It was found that this polymorphism was associated with the downregulation of ADAMTS5 expression, increasing MVD, tumor progression, dedifferentiation, and metastasis. A recent in vivo and in vitro study has shown that downregulation of this gene accelerates hepatocellular carcinoma angiogenesis and carcinogenesis by modifying VEGF expression (14). The survival analysis further indicated that the rs2830581 polymorphism was associated with poor outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma patients, highlighting the potential roles of this polymorphism in predicting the prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma induced by AFB1 exposure. Collectively, these results suggest that ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism could modulate the antitumorigenesis role of ADAMTS5, increasing AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk and shortening prognosis of this tumor.

Another important finding in this study was that ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism was found to modify the effects of TACE treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma patients. This is likely due to the downregulation of ADAMTS5 expression and increased MVD, an important control factor for TACE treatment.

In the current study, major strengths were its prospective two-stage design, large sample size, and the panel of a relatively large number of systematically identified SNPs in ADAMTS5. The effects of possible confounders (including age, gender, nationality, and HBV and HCV infection status) were controlled with an individually matched design. In addition, AAA and TP53M was used to test this exposure and correlation because AAA is a stable biomarker reflecting long-term AFB1 exposure status, whereas TP53M is the characteristic genetic change resulting from AFB1 exposure, and higher frequency of this mutation predicts higher AFB1 exposure and higher hepatocellular carcinoma risk. In the current study, we found hepatocellular carcinoma cases had a higher serum AAA and more than 70% of them featured TP53M, which was similar to the data from other countries of South East Asia (30).

However, there were several limitations to our study. First, because 74 SNPs were evaluated in the screening set, whereas only 4 were evaluated in the validation set, false-negative results were a considerable issue. In this study, the correction for multiple testing was done using the correlation matrix-based method, which takes into account the LD between SNPs (22). Second, potential selection bias might have occurred through the selection of hospital-based control subjects. Third, the increased risk with AFB1 exposure seen in this study was probably underestimated because liver disease itself may affect the metabolism of AFB1 and modify the levels of AFB1 adducts (2, 31). Finally, although we analyzed the effects of the ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphisms on the ADAMTS5 expression and MVD, we failed to accomplish more functional analysis. Thus, more functional analyses deserve elucidation based on large samples and a combination of genes and AFB1 exposure.

This study represents the first report describing genetic polymorphisms of ADAMTS5 and their association with AFB1-related hepatocellular carcinoma risk and prognosis. The findings provide an additional insight into the ADAMTS5 rs2830581 polymorphism as biologic determinants of hepatocellular carcinoma risk and prognosis related to AFB1 exposure. Interestingly, the effects of ADAMTS5 polymorphism on TACE therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment indicated a positive association between the two. Understanding the different value in individual patients will allow more information counseling with regard to screening, prevention, treatment options, follow-up plans, and approaches for secondary prevention. Therefore, these findings, in combination with clinicopathologic information of hepatocellular carcinoma, could improve the identification of high-risk populations, especially from high AFB1 exposure areas.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Conception and design: X.-D. Long

Development of methodology: X.-Y. Huang, X.-D. Long

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): J.-G. Yao, Y. Ma

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): X.-Y. Huang, J.-G. Yao, B.-C. Huang

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): Q. Xia, X.-D. Long

Study supervision: Q. Xia, X.-D. Long

The authors would thank Dr. Qiu-Xiang Liang, Dr. Yun Yi, and Dr. Yuan-Feng Zhou for sample collection and management, and Dr. Hua Huang for molecular biochemical techniques. The authors also thank all members of the Department of Medical Test and Infective Control, Affiliated Hospital of Youjiang Medical College for Nationalities, for their help.

This study was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81160255, 81372639, and 81572353, X.D. Long; 81472243, Q. Xia; and 81460423, X.Y. Huang), the Innovation Program of Guangxi Municipal Education Department (201204LX674, X.Y. Huang), Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (13YZ035, X.D. Long), the Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi (2015GXNSFAA139223 and 2013GXNSFAA019251, X.D. Long; 2014GXNSFDA118021, J.G. Yao and X.D. Long; and 2014GXNSFAA118144, X.Y. Huang), Key Discipline and Specialty Foundation of Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning, and “Shu Guang” project (supported by Shanghai Municipal Education Commission and Shanghai Education Development Foundation, #13SG19, X.D. Long), and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi Health and Family Planning Commission (2013781, X.Y. Huang and X.D. Long).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Siegel
R
,
Ma
J
,
Zou
Z
,
Jemal
A
. 
Cancer statistics, 2014
.
CA Cancer J Clin
2014
;
64
:
9
29
.
2.
Long
XD
,
Yao
JD
,
Yang
Q
,
Huang
CH
,
Liao
P
,
Nong
LG
, et al
Polymorphisms of DNA repair genes and toxicological effects of aflatoxin B1 exposure
. In:
Faulkner
AG
,
editor
. 
Aflatoxins: food sources, occurrence and toxicological effects
. 1st ed.
New York, NY
:
Nova Science Publishers
; 
2014
.
p.
107
24
.
3.
Xia
Q
,
Huang
XY
,
Xue
F
,
Zhang
JJ
,
Zhai
B
,
Kong
DC
, et al
Genetic polymorphisms of DNA repair genes and DNA repair capacity related to aflatoxin b1 (AFB1)-induced DNA damages
. In:
Chen
C
,
editor
. 
New research directions in DNA repair
. 1st ed.
Rijeka
:
InTech
; 
2013
.
p.
377
412
.
4.
Yao
JG
,
Huang
XY
,
Long
XD
. 
Interaction of DNA repair gene polymorphisms and aflatoxin B1 in the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Int J Clin Exp Pathol
2014
;
7
:
6231
44
.
5.
Mochizuki
S
,
Okada
Y
. 
ADAMs in cancer cell proliferation and progression
.
Cancer Sci
2007
;
98
:
621
8
.
6.
Zhang
J
,
Qin
X
,
Sun
Q
,
Guo
H
,
Wu
X
,
Xie
F
, et al
Transcriptional control of PAX4-regulated miR-144/451 modulates metastasis by suppressing ADAMs expression
.
Oncogene
2015
;
34
:
3283
95
.
7.
Wu
N
,
Chen
J
,
Liu
H
,
Zhao
L
,
Liu
S
,
Liu
J
, et al
The involvement of ADAMTS-5 genetic polymorphisms in predisposition and diffusion tensor imaging alterations of lumbar disc degeneration
.
J Orthop Res
2014
;
32
:
686
94
.
8.
Sjoblom
T
,
Jones
S
,
Wood
LD
,
Parsons
DW
,
Lin
J
,
Barber
TD
, et al
The consensus coding sequences of human breast and colorectal cancers
.
Science
2006
;
314
:
268
74
.
9.
Sharghi-Namini
S
,
Fan
H
,
Sulochana
KN
,
Potturi
P
,
Xiang
W
,
Chong
YS
, et al
The first but not the second thrombospondin type 1 repeat of ADAMTS5 functions as an angiogenesis inhibitor
.
Biochem Biophys Res Commun
2008
;
371
:
215
9
.
10.
Roman-Gomez
J
,
Jimenez-Velasco
A
,
Agirre
X
,
Prosper
F
,
Heiniger
A
,
Torres
A
. 
Lack of CpG island methylator phenotype defines a clinical subtype of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia associated with good prognosis
.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
7043
9
.
11.
Rodriguez-Lopez
J
,
Mustafa
Z
,
Pombo-Suarez
M
,
Malizos
KN
,
Rego
I
,
Blanco
FJ
, et al
Genetic variation including nonsynonymous polymorphisms of a major aggrecanase, ADAMTS-5, in susceptibility to osteoarthritis
.
Arthritis Rheum
2008
;
58
:
435
41
.
12.
Rajasekaran
S
,
Kanna
RM
,
Senthil
N
,
Raveendran
M
,
Cheung
KM
,
Chan
D
, et al
Phenotype variations affect genetic association studies of degenerative disc disease: conclusions of analysis of genetic association of 58 single nucleotide polymorphisms with highly specific phenotypes for disc degeneration in 332 subjects
.
Spine J
2013
;
13
:
1309
20
.
13.
Li
C
,
Xiong
Y
,
Zhong
Z
,
Zhang
S
,
Peng
Y
,
Wang
L
, et al
Association between a variant in ADAMTS5 and the susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma in a Chinese Han Population
.
Cell Biochem Biophys
2015
;
72
:
221
5
.
14.
Li
C
,
Xiong
Y
,
Yang
X
,
Wang
L
,
Zhang
S
,
Dai
N
, et al
Lost expression of ADAMTS5 protein associates with progression and poor prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Drug Des Devel Ther
2015
;
9
:
1773
83
.
15.
Kumar
S
,
Sharghi-Namini
S
,
Rao
N
,
Ge
R
. 
ADAMTS5 functions as an anti-angiogenic and anti-tumorigenic protein independent of its proteoglycanase activity
.
Am J Pathol
2012
;
181
:
1056
68
.
16.
Kim
YH
,
Lee
HC
,
Kim
SY
,
Yeom
YI
,
Ryu
KJ
,
Min
BH
, et al
Epigenomic analysis of aberrantly methylated genes in colorectal cancer identifies genes commonly affected by epigenetic alterations
.
Ann Surg Oncol
2011
;
18
:
2338
47
.
17.
Gu
J
,
Rong
J
,
Guan
F
,
Jiang
L
,
Zhang
T
,
Tao
S
, et al
Association of ADAMTS5 gene polymorphisms with osteoarthritis in Chinese Han population: a community-based case-control study
.
Rheumatol Int
2013
;
33
:
2893
7
.
18.
El Khoury
L
,
Posthumus
M
,
Collins
M
,
Handley
CJ
,
Cook
J
,
Raleigh
SM
. 
Polymorphic variation within the ADAMTS2, ADAMTS14, ADAMTS5, ADAM12 and TIMP2 genes and the risk of Achilles tendon pathology: a genetic association study
.
J Sci Med Sport
2013
;
16
:
493
8
.
19.
Long
XD
,
Zhao
D
,
Wang
C
,
Huang
XY
,
Yao
JG
,
Ma
Y
, et al
Genetic polymorphisms in DNA repair genes XRCC4 and XRCC5 and aflatoxin B1-related hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Epidemiology
2013
;
24
:
671
81
.
20.
Long
XD
,
Huang
XY
,
Yao
JG
,
Liao
P
,
Tang
YJ
,
Ma
Y
, et al
Polymorphisms in the precursor microRNAs and aflatoxin B1-related hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Mol Carcinog
2015
.
doi: 10.1002/mc.22350.
21.
Long
XD
,
Yao
JG
,
Zeng
Z
,
Ma
Y
,
Huang
XY
,
Wei
ZH
, et al
Polymorphisms in the coding region of X-ray repair complementing group 4 and aflatoxin B1-related hepatocellular carcinoma
.
Hepatology
2013
;
58
:
171
81
.
22.
Nyholt
DR
. 
A simple correction for multiple testing for single-nucleotide polymorphisms in linkage disequilibrium with each other
.
Am J Hum Genet
2004
;
74
:
765
9
.
23.
Long
XD
,
Ma
Y
,
Zhou
YF
,
Ma
AM
,
Fu
GH
. 
Polymorphism in xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C codon 939 and aflatoxin B1-related hepatocellular carcinoma in the Guangxi population
.
Hepatology
2010
;
52
:
1301
9
.
24.
CSLC, CSCO
. 
Diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer: a standardized expert consensus
.
Chin Clin Oncol
2009
;
14
:
259
69
.
25.
Kintakas
C
,
McCulloch
DR
. 
Emerging roles for ADAMTS5 during development and disease
.
Matrix Biol
2011
;
30
:
311
7
.
26.
Glasson
SS
,
Askew
R
,
Sheppard
B
,
Carito
B
,
Blanchet
T
,
Ma
HL
, et al
Deletion of active ADAMTS5 prevents cartilage degradation in a murine model of osteoarthritis
.
Nature
2005
;
434
:
644
8
.
27.
Porter
S
,
Scott
SD
,
Sassoon
EM
,
Williams
MR
,
Jones
JL
,
Girling
AC
, et al
Dysregulated expression of adamalysin-thrombospondin genes in human breast carcinoma
.
Clin Cancer Res
2004
;
10
:
2429
40
.
28.
Nakada
M
,
Miyamori
H
,
Kita
D
,
Takahashi
T
,
Yamashita
J
,
Sato
H
, et al
Human glioblastomas overexpress ADAMTS-5 that degrades brevican
.
Acta Neuropathol
2005
;
110
:
239
46
.
29.
Cross
NA
,
Chandrasekharan
S
,
Jokonya
N
,
Fowles
A
,
Hamdy
FC
,
Buttle
DJ
, et al
The expression and regulation of ADAMTS-1, -4, -5, -9, and -15, and TIMP-3 by TGFbeta1 in prostate cells: relevance to the accumulation of versican
.
Prostate
2005
;
63
:
269
75
.
30.
Kensler
TW
,
Roebuck
BD
,
Wogan
GN
,
Groopman
JD
. 
Aflatoxin: a 50-year odyssey of mechanistic and translational toxicology
.
Toxicol Sci
2011
;
120
Suppl 1
:
S28
S48
.
31.
Long
XD
,
Huang
HD
,
Xia
Q
. 
The polymorphism of XRCC3 codon 241 and the hotspot mutation in the TP53 gene in hepatocellular carcinoma induced by aflatoxin B1
.
J Tumor
2014
;
2
:
272
7
.

Supplementary data