Table 2.
Studies of VEGFA polymorphisms and aggressiveness of breast cancer.
| SNPs | Authors | Population | Case/control | Aggressiveness |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −2578C/A rs699947 | Jin et al.[51] | Polish, German, Swedish | 1525/1503 | AA genotype was associated with low grade tumor, p (trend) = 0.04. |
| Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. | |
| Kidd et al.[67] | Caucasian | 441/− | ER and PR positive patients with CC genotype had higher incidence of recurrent, p (trend) = 0.026 | |
| Etienne-Grimaldi et al.[80] | Caucasian | 137/− | N.S. | |
|
| ||||
| −2489C/T rs1005230 | Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. |
|
| ||||
| −1498C/T rs833061 | Lu et al.[81] | Chinese | 1193/− | CC genotype tended to be associated with decreased OS, HR = 1.5 (0.9–2.5), p (trend) = 0.11. |
| Balasubramanian et al.[69] | Caucasian | 500/498 | N.S. | |
| Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. | |
| Etienne-Grimaldi et al.[80] | Caucasian | 137/− | N.S. | |
|
| ||||
| −1154G/A rs1570360 | Jin et al.[51] | Polish, German | 586/570 | N.S. |
| Smith et al.[71] | English | 263/144 | AG was associated with good prognosis *, OR = 2.63 (1.12–6.20), p = 0.02. GG was associated with negative ER, OR = 0.35 (0.14–0.84), p = 0.02. | |
| Kidd et al.[67] | Caucasian | 441/− | N.S. | |
| Etienne-Grimaldi et al.[80] | Caucasian | 137/− | N.S. | |
|
| ||||
| SNPs | Authors | Population | Case/control | Aggressiveness |
|
| ||||
| −634G/C rs2010963 | Jin et al.[51] | Swedish | 941/936 | CC genotype was associated with tumor size > 20 mm, OR = 2.20 (1.27–3.82), p = 0.004, and higher histologic grade, p = 0.009. |
| Lu et al.[81] | Chinese | 1193/− | G allele was associated with decreased OS. HR = 1.6 (1.0–2.5) for GG genotype. | |
| Balasubramanian et al.[69] | Caucasian | 500/498 | C allele was associated with maximum size of invasive component, p (trend) = 0.02. | |
| Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | C allele was associated with small tumor size, p < 0.001. | |
| Oliveira et al.[72] | Caucasian/Afric an-American | 235/235 | N.S. | |
| Kidd et al.[67] | Caucasian | 441/− | N.S. | |
| Etienne-Grimaldi et al.[80] | Caucasian | 137/− | N.S. | |
| Beeghly-Fadiel et al.[73] | Chinese | Stage 1:1193/− Stage 2:5381/− | N.S. | |
|
| ||||
| −7C/T rs25648 | Balasubramanian et al.[69] | Caucasian | 500/498 | N.S. |
| Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. | |
|
| ||||
| 936C/T rs3025039 | Eroglu et al.[74] | Turkish | 60/60 | N.S. |
| Lu et al.[81] | Chinese | 1193/− | N.S. | |
| Wolf et al.[82] | Caucasian | 37/− | Number of T allele was correlated with FDG uptake score, p (Spearman correlation) = 0.032. | |
| Balasubramanian et al.[69] | Caucasian | 500/498 | N.S. | |
| Krippl et al.[60] | Austrian | 500/500 | N.S. | |
| Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. | |
| Oliveira et al.[72] | Caucasian/African-American | 235/235 | CC genotype was correlated with increased risk for aggressive breast cancer, OR = 1.76 (1.10–2.90) and negative ER, OR = 0.86 (1.10–3.10). | |
| Knechtel et al.[83] | Caucasian | 432/− | N.S. | |
| Etienne-Grimaldi et al.[80] | Caucasian | 137/− | TT and CT genotypes were associated with longer time to progression when compared to 936 CC genotype (11.5 vs. 9.7 months, p = 0.022). | |
|
| ||||
| 1612G/A rs10434 | Langsenlehner et al.[68] | Austrian | 804/804 | N.S. |
*
According to Nottingham Prognostic Index; N.S.: not significant.