Skip to main content
Cancer Medicine logoLink to Cancer Medicine
. 2019 Mar 18;8(5):2545–2552. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2068

Association between polymorphisms in MicroRNA target sites of RAD51D genes and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma

Yan‐Ji Jiang 1,2, Jian‐Hong Zhong 1, Zi‐Han Zhou 1,2, Mo‐Qin Qiu 1,2, Xian‐Guo Zhou 1, Ying‐Chun Liu 1, Rong‐Rui Huo 1, Xiu‐Mei Liang 1, Zhu Chen 3, Qiu‐Ling Lin 1,2, Xiang‐Yuan Yu 4,, Hong‐Ping Yu 1,2,
PMCID: PMC6536933  PMID: 30883040

Abstract

RAD51D (RAD51L3) is a member of the RAD51 gene family which plays important roles in maintaining genomic stability and preventing DNA damage. This study is aimed to investigate the associations between RAD51D polymorphisms and the hereditary susceptibility of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this study we conducted a hospital–based case‐control study including 805 cases (HCC patients) and 846 controls (nontumor patients) in Guangxi, China. A total of two Single–nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs12947947 and rs28363292 of RAD51D were selected and genotyped. Although we did not find two SNPs individually that had any significant main effect on risk of HCC, We found that the combined genotypes with 1‐2 risk genotypes were associated with significantly increased overall risk of HCC (OR = 1.462, 95% CI = 1.050‐2.036). According to the results of further stratification analysis, GT/GG genotype of rs28363292 increased HCC risk in zhuang people (OR = 3.913, 95% CI = 1.873‐8.175) and nonhepatitis B virus (HBV) infection population (OR = 1.774, 95% CI = 1.060‐2.969), the combined 1‐2 risk genotypes increased the risk of HCC in zhuang people (OR = 2.817, 95% CI = 1.532‐5.182) and non‐HBV infected population (OR = 1.567, 95% CI = 1.042‐2.358). Our results suggest that rs12947947 and rs28363292 polymorphisms may jointly contribute to the risk of HCC. Further large studies and functional studies are required to validate our findings.

Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma, RAD51D, single–nucleotide polymorphism, susceptibility

1. INTRODUCTION

Liver cancer is the fifth most common cancer in the world and the second leading cause of death.1, 2 Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary malignancy of the liver, and it accounts for between 85% and 90% of these malignancies.3, 4 Each year there are approximately 630 000 new cases of HCC in the world and more than half of the new cases occur in China alone.5 HCC has been regarded as a complicated disease caused by factors including hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV), tobacco use, and alcohol consumption.6, 7 However, the fact that only a small proportion of patients with established risk factors eventually develop HCC suggests that genetic susceptibility may play an important role in HCC development.

Our genesis constantly exposed to a variety of endogenous and exogenous factors that cause DNA damage, such as ultraviolet light, ionizing radiation and genotoxic chemicals.9, 10 Fortunately, DNA repair has lots of distinct linear pathways that can maintain genome stability while effectively preventing or repairing various types of DNA damage.11 Homologous recombination (HR) is a component of the DNA repair pathway, and it is essential to support DNA replication and repair DNA damage, such as DNA double–strand breaks (DSBs) and DNA cross‐links.12, 13 It has been demonstrated that various HCC–associated risk factors are able to promote DNA damages. There are several types of DNA damage and corresponding repair pathways that have been implicated in HCC such as stalled DNA replication fork by HR16 RAD51D (RAD51L3), located in 17q12, is a member of the RAD51 gene family which is known to be a key player in the HR pathway.17, 18 A number of studies have indicated that the genetic variations of RAD51D may contribute to the development of cancer, such as ovarian cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer and colorectal cancer.19, 20 However, the association between Single–nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of RAD51D and hereditary susceptibility of HCC has not been investigated.

SNPs are the most frequent type of genetic variation in the human genome and usually occur in noncoding regions, they can affect transcriptional regulation or posttranscriptional gene expression. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short noncoding single–stranded RNAs that regulate gene expression by binding to target sites in the 3′untranslated region (3′UTR) of mRNAs. Binding to the target site alters the translation efficiency and/or stability of targeted mRNAs. Many studies have linked that 3′UTR SNPs located within miRNA target sites with cancer etiology and susceptibility, which is likely the result of altered miRNA binding to target mRNAs.27, 28 Several studies suggested that several miRNAs have been implicated in DNA damage response and DNA repair. The deregulation of some of these miRNAs are involved in genomic instability and chemosensitivity of tumors.31, 32 Jen‐Wei Huang et al reported that the targeting of RAD51D by miR‐103/107 contributes to the regulation of DNA repair.34

In this study, we conducted a screening on RAD51D from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) dbSNP database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and NIEHS SNPinfo (http://snpinfo.niehs.nih.gov/) to seek candidate SNPs in the Chinese population. Eventually, we selected two miRNA target site SNPs for this study: rs12947947 (G > A) and rs28363292 (T > G) which are SNPs located in the 3′UTR of RAD51D. Based on the above facts, we hypothesize that sequence variation on two selected SNPs in miRNA target sites are associated with the development of HCC. In order to confirm this hypothesis, we conducted a case‐control study examining whether these two SNPs were associated with risk of HCC development.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study population

A total of 805 cases and 846 controls were included in our hospital–based case‐control study. All participants of the cases underwent hepatic resection and were newly diagnosed as HCC patients by pathology. Cases with previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy for tumors were excluded. The controls were nontumor patients without HCC hospitalized in the same period, and frequency matched with case group by age (±5 years), gender, and nation. Cases or controls with HCV infection or other cancers were also excluded. All subjects were recruited from January 2007 to April 2011 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University and Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University. All participants in the study signed informed consent. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee Review Board of Guangxi Medical University and Guilin Medical University.

2.2. Questionnaire survey and blood sample collection

The subjects were investigated with a uniform epidemiological questionnaire that covered the demographic characteristics (age, gender, nation), smoking, alcohol consumption, and HBV infection. Ever smokers were defined as individuals who had smoked more than 6 months continuously or cumulatively in their lifetimes; ever drinkers were defined as individuals who had drunk alcoholic beverages at least once a week for more than 6 months. HBV infection was defined as positive for HBV surface antigen (HBsAg).35 5 mL of peripheral blood sample was obtained from each study object, of which 1 mL was used to detect HBV infection status. Subsequently, genomic DNA was extracted according to the phenol–chloroform method and stored at −80°C.

2.3. SNP selection

We used the NIEHS SNPinfo (http://snpinfo.niehs.nih.gov/) to identify the RAD51D functional SNPs by using these criteria: (1) SNPs were potential target sites of miRNA. (2) The minor allele frequency (MAF) > 0.05 in Chinese population. (3) The pairwise linkage disequilibrium (LD) had an r2 threshold of 0.8. As a result, we got SNPs rs12947947, rs28363277, rs28363292 (Table S1), and LD Tag SNP selection result (Figure S1). In addition, we screened the SNPs located in the 3′UTR region of RAD51D gene with the NCBI dbSNP database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). However, We found that the rs28363277 is not in the 3′UTR region of RAD51D. Finally, rs12947947 (G > A) and rs28363292 (T > G) of RAD51D were selected for our study.

2.4. SNP genotyping

The Agena MassARRAY genotyping system (Agena; San Diego, CA) was used for genotyping following the manufacturer's instructions. The primers used for RAD51D of rs12947947 were: F 5′‐ACGTTGGATGCAGCAGCAAAGGCAAGTTAG‐3′ and R 5′‐ACGTTGGATGTGTGCATCACCATTGTGTCC‐3′. The primers used for RAD51D of rs28363292 were: F 5′‐ACGTTGGATGATGCTTACAGAGAGTGAGGC‐3′ and R 5′‐ACGTTGGATGACTGGTGACTACAGACGTTC‐3′. Each PCR reaction mixture (5 μL) contained 1 μL 10 ng/μL DNA template, 1.8 μL ddH2O, 0.5 μL 10x PCR Buffer (with 15 mmol/L MgCl2), 0.4 μL 25 mmol/L MgCl2, 0.1 μL 25 mmol/L dNTPs, 1 μL 0.5 μmol/L primer Mix, and 0.2 μL 5 U/μL Hot Star Taq polymerase. PCR reactions were carried out at 94°C for 15 minutes, 94°C for 45 cycles of 20 seconds, 56°C for 30 seconds, 72°C for 1 minute, and finally incubated at 72°C for 3 minutes. Two blank control wells were used in each 96‐well plate. The results of the genotyping were analyzed with the MassARRAY Typer software version 4.0.

2.5. Statistical analysis

The distributions of general characteristics between cases and controls were performed using chi‐square test. Hardy‐Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) in the controls was tested using a chi‐square goodness‐of‐fit test. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The multivariate adjustment included age, gender, nation, smoking, drinking, and HBV infection. P < 0.05 was the criterion of statistical significance and all statistical tests were two‐tailed. The data were treated using SPSS 17.0 statistical software (SPSS Institute, Chicago, IL).

3. RESULTS

3.1. Characteristics of the study population

Distributions of general characteristics of the study population are presented in Table 1. In brief, there were no statistical differences in the distribution of age, gender and nation between HCC patients and control subjects (P > 0.05). However, the HCC patients were more likely to be smokers, drinkers and HBV infected individuals (P < 0.001).

Table 1.

Distribution of general characteristics in HCC patients and control subjects

Characteristics Cases n (%) Controls n (%) χ2 P‐value a
All subjects 805 (100%) 846 (100%)
Age (years) 0.146 0.702
≦49 413 (51.30) 442 (52.25)
>49 392 (48.70) 404 (47.75)
Gender 2.964 0.085
Male 712 (88.45) 770 (91.02)
Female 93 (11.55) 76 (8.98)
Nation 5.886 0.053
Han 512 (63.60) 489 (57.80)
Zhuang 276 (34.29) 338 (39.95)
other 17 (2.11) 19 (2.25)
Smoking 54.067 <0.001
No 468 (58.14) 636 (75.18)
Yes 337 (41.86) 210 (24.82)
Drinking 50.420 <0.001
No 506 (62.86) 666 (78.72)
Yes 299 (37.14) 180 (21.28)
HBV infection 937.518 <0.001
(−) 125 (15.53) 767 (90.66)
(+) 680 (84.47) 79 (9.34)

HBV, hepatitis B virus.

a

Two–sided Chi‐square test.

3.2. Distribution of genotypes and risk of HCC

The genotype distributions of RAD51D polymorphisms and their associations with HCC risk are shown in Table 2. The genotype frequencies of rs12947947, rs28363292 in the controls obeyed HWE (χ2 = 2.761, P = 0.097; χ2 = 0.693, P = 0.405, respectively). The chi‐square test showed that the genotype distributions of the two SNPs had no significant differences in the cases and the controls (P > 0.05). Although none of the variant genotypes alone was associated with significantly altered risk, both the A allele of rs12947947 and the G allele of rs28363292 tended to be associated with nonsignificantly increased HCC risk (OR = 1.428, 95%CI = 0.952‐2.143 for AG/AA of rs12947947, and OR = 1.384, 95%CI = 0.903‐2.121 for GT/GG of rs28363292).

Table 2.

Genotype frequencies of RAD51D polymorphisms between cases and controls and their associations with risk of HCC

Genotypes Cases n (%) Controls n (%) P a Adjusted OR (95% CI)b P b
rs12947947
GG 683 (84.84) 711 (84.04) 0.478 1.000
AG 117 (14.53) 125 (14.78) 1.497 (0.989‐2.265) 0.056
AA 5 (0.62) 10 (1.18) 0.575 (0.099‐3.339) 0.537
AG/AA 122 (15.16) 135 (15.96) 0.653 1.428 (0.952‐2.143) 0.085
rs28363292
TT 677 (84.10) 740 (87.47) 0.054 1.000
GT 121 (15.03) 104 (12.29) 1.356 (0.879‐2.093) 0.171
GG 7 (0.87) 2 (0.24) 2.611 (0.241‐28.331) 0.430
GT/GG 128 (15.90) 106 (12.53) 0.050 1.384 (0.903‐2.121) 0.136
Combined risk genotypesc
0 risk genotype 565 (70.19) 614 (72.58) 0.283 1.000 0.024
1‐2 risk genotype 240 (29.81) 232 (27.42) 1.462 (1.050‐2.036)

Bold value indicates statistically significant, P < 0.05.

a

Two‐side Chi‐square test for genotype distribution between cases and conctrols.

b

Adjusted for age, gender, nation, smoking, drinking, and HBV infection in a logistic regression model.

c

RAD51D rs12947947 AG/AA and rs28363292 GT/GG were considered as risk genotypes.

Considering the potential combined effect of RAD51D SNPs on risk of HCC, we combined them by the number of the putative risk genotypes (i.e., rs12947947 AG/AA and rs28363292 GT/GG) to assess their possible combined effect on HCC risk. We found that the combined genotypes with 1‐2 risk genotypes was associated with significantly increased overall risk of HCC (OR = 1.462, 95% CI = 1.050‐2.036) (Table 2).

3.3. Stratification analysis

In order to further identify the relationship between rs12947947, rs28363292 polymorphism and HCC risk, the dominant genetic model of the two SNPs and combined genotype were stratified by subgroups of age, gender, nation, smoking, drinking, and HBV infection. As shown in Table 3, GT/GG genotype of rs28363292 had a relationship with a significantly increased HCC risk in zhuang people (OR = 3.913, 95% CI = 1.873‐8.175) and non‐HBV infected population (OR = 1.774, 95% CI = 1.060‐2.969), compared with TT genotype. Interestingly, further analysis revealed that the combined 1‐2 risk genotypes were associated with a statistically significantly increased HCC risk in zhuang people (OR = 2.817, 95% CI = 1.532‐5.182) and non‐HBV infected population (OR = 1.567, 95%CI = 1.042‐2.358), compared with the combined genotype than with the 0 risk genotype (Table 4 ).

Table 3.

Stratification analyses between rs12947947, rs28363292 polymorphisms and HCC risk

Variables rs12947947 Adjusted OR (95% CI)a P a rs28363292 Adjusted OR (95% CI)a P a
(cases/controls) (cases/controls)
Genotypes GG AG/AA TT GT/GG
Age
≤49 352/372 61/70 1.386 (0.730‐2.630) 0.318 349/382 64/60 1.146 (0.599‐2.193) 0.680
>49 331/339 61/65 1.370 (0.810‐2.315) 0.240 328/358 64/46 1.611 (0.912‐2.845) 0.100
Gender
Female 78/66 15/10 2.667 (0.860‐8.269) 0.089 77/65 16/11 1.233 (0.367‐4.147) 0.735
Male 605/645 107/125 1.298 (0.839‐2.007) 0.241 600/675 112/95 1.425 (0.900‐2.257) 0.131
Nation
Han 432/406 80/83 1.397 (0.856‐2.280) 0.181 431/421 81/68 0.859 (0.508‐1.454) 0.571
Zhuang 237/287 39/51 1.446 (0.692‐3.021) 0.326 229/303 47/35 3.913 (1.873‐8.175) <0.001
Other 14/18 3/1 0.272 (0.002‐43.938) 0.616 17/16 0/3
Smoking
No 393/537 75/99 1.660 (0.998‐2.762) 0.051 394/555 74/81 1.292 (0.751‐2.224) 0.355
Yes 290/174 47/36 1.121 (0.568‐2.210) 0.742 283/185 54/25 1.559 (0.766‐3.173) 0.221
Drinking
No 436/565 70/101 1.410 (0.849‐2.340) 0.184 418/579 88/87 1.354 (0.812‐2.260) 0.246
Yes 247/146 52/34 1.484 (0.750‐2.935) 0.257 259/161 40/19 1.483 (0.662‐3.324) 0.339
HBV infection
(−) 100/638 25/129 1.241 (0.758‐2.033) 0.391 101/674 24/93 1.774 (1.060‐2.969) 0.029
(+) 583/73 97/6 2.097 (0.881‐4.989) 0.094 576/66 104/13 0.940 (0.496‐1.780) 0.849

Bold value indicates statistically significant, P < 0.05.

a

Adjusted for age, gender, nation, smoking, drinking, and HBV infection in a logistic regression model.

Table 4.

Stratification analyses between the combined genotypes of RAD51D polymorphisms and HCC risk

Variables Combined risk genotypesa (cases/controls) Adjusted OR (95% CI)b P b
0 risk genotype 1‐2 risk genotypes
Age
≤49 293/318 120/124 1.317 (0.791‐2.194) 0.290
>49 272/296 120/108 1.520 (0.984‐2.349) 0.059
Gender
Female 63/55 30/21 2.153 (0.833‐5.563) 0.113
Male 502/559 210/211 1.387 (0.973‐1.977 0.071
Nation
Han 357/343 155/146 1.101 (0.737‐1.645) 0.639
Zhuang 194/256 82/82 2.817 (1.532‐5.182) <0.001
other 14/15 3/4 0.154 (0.001‐18.491) 0.444
Smoking
No 326/463 142/173 1.502 (0.987‐2.284) 0.057
Yes 239/151 98/59 1.405 (0.813‐2.425) 0.223
Drinking
No 354/485 152/181 1.393 (0.929‐2.088) 0.109
Yes 211/129 88/51 1.624 (0.906‐2.913) 0.104
HBV infection
(−) 78/554 47/213 1.567 (1.042‐2.358) 0.031
(+) 487/60 193/19 1.293 (0.747‐2.240) 0.359

Bold value indicates statistically significant, P < 0.05.

a

Risk genotypes were represented by rs12947947 AG/AA and rs28363292 GT/GG.

b

Adjusted for age, gender, nation, smoking, drinking, and HBV infection in a logistic regression model.

4. DISCUSSION

In this study, we investigated whether RAD51D gene rs12947947 and rs28363292 polymorphisms are associated with the risk of HCC in the population of South China. Although we did not find two SNPs individually that had any significant main effect on risk of HCC, we did find that those who carried the 1‐2 combined risk genotypes (i.e., rs12947947 AG/AA and rs28363292 GT/GG) appeared to have an increased risk of HCC. In conclusion, we found that the two selected SNPs had a joint effect on the HCC risk.

The RAD51 protein and its paralogs (RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, XRCC2 and XRCC3) are recruited to form a helical nucleofilament on the exposed single–stranded DNA (ssDNA) for the maintenance of genome stability in mammalian cells.36 In humans, the functions of the paralogs as mediators of HR demonstrate important tumor suppressor activity. Previous studies found some potentially functional SNPs of RAD51 gene family polymorphisms (eg, RAD51‐135 G > C, XRCC2 R188H, XRCC3 T241M) to be associated with various types of cancer risks, including prostate cancer and lung cancer, breast cancer.37, 38 RAD51D protein is believed to have ssDNA binding activity and DNA‐–timulated adenosine triphosphatase (ATPase) activity. Moreover, the complex of RAD51D and XRCC2 is likely to be important for genetic recombination and protection against DNA–damaging agents.40 Therefore, the mutations in RAD51D lead to the accumulation of unrepaired DSBs and are associated with the development of tumors. In addition, miRNAs are posttranscriptionally downregulate gene expression through translational repression and mRNA destabilization.41 A variety of miRNAs have been found to regulate tumorigenesis and responses to cancer treatment by inducing chemosensitization by affecting RAD51 expression in HR repair mechanisms.42, 43 miR‐103 and miR‐107 was shown to directly target and regulate RAD51D, which is critical for miR‐103/107–mediated chemosensitization.34 Hence, the mutations in miRNA target sites of RAD51D are also associated with the development of tumors. It is possible that rs12947947 and rs28363292 polymorphisms in miRNA target sites of RAD51D genes may jointly contribute to the risk of HCC. However, further large studies and functional studies are required to validate our findings.

The genetic variant E233G in RAD51D was regarded as a potential low–penetrance breast cancer allele in high‐risk, site‐specific, familial breast cancer.44 Aditi et al found that the RAD51D (E233G) breast cancer associated variant increased cell growth and cisplatin resistance dependent upon the status of the p53 gene in human breast carcinoma cell lines.45 Moreover, Phillip et al investigated that a p53 deletion was sufficient to extend the life span of RAD51D–deficient embryos by up to 6 days and rescued the cell lethal phenotype.46 The p53 tumor–suppressor gene plays a central role in regulating cell growth, DNA repair and apoptosis.47 Previous studies strongly demonstrated that RAD51D functions are monitored by p53.48, 49 However, further study of this mechanism is needed.

The occurrence of HCC is considered to be a multistage process involving multiple genetic or environmental factors. Interaction and cross‐regulation of distinct factors together promote HCC development.5 However, from the stratification analysis results in this study, we did not find the interaction of rs28363292 and HBV infection had any combined effect on HCC risk. Besides, we also did not find the interaction of the combined genotypes and HBV infection had any combined effect on HCC risk.

In our study, Neyman bias may be avoided by selecting newly diagnosed HCC patients as cases. However, some limitations of this study also should be considered when interpreting the results. First, our study was a hospital–based case‐control study with potential selection bias. The sample size in the stratification analyses might be relatively small, which could not provide enough statistical power. Second, more than 80% cases were HBV infected. Such results need to be confirmed in an HCV epidemic population. As a result, more diverse populations will be needed to prove the results in future studies.

5. CONCLUSION

To summarize, we selected two SNPs within noncoding regions of RAD51D and observed that none had a main effect on HCC cancer risk. However, given only a modest effect of each SNP on its own, evaluating their joint effects may help us better understand the effect of SNPs in HCC cancer. Indeed, we found that the combined genotypes of these two polymorphisms (i.e., rs12947947 AG/AA and rs28363292 GT/GG) were associated with a statistically significantly increased risk of HCC suggesting that rs12947947 and rs28363292 SNPs may jointly contribute to the risk of HCC. However, further large studies and functional studies are required to validate our findings.

Supporting information

 

Jiang Y‐J, Zhong J‐H, Zhou Z‐H, et al. Association between polymorphisms in MicroRNA target sites of RAD51D genes and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Med. 2019;8:2545–2552. 10.1002/cam4.2068

Yan‐Ji Jiang and Jian‐Hong Zhong should be considered joint first author.

Contributor Information

Xiang‐Yuan Yu, Email: guilinxiangyuan123@163.com.

Hong‐Ping Yu, Email: yhp268@163.com.

REFERENCES

  • 1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet‐Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87‐108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in globocan 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359‐E386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Lafaro KJ, Demirjian AN, Pawlik TM. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:1‐17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. McGlynn KA, Petrick JL, London WT. Global epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: an emphasis on demographic and regional variability. Clin Liver Dis. 2015;19:223‐238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Ding J, Wang H. Multiple interactive factors in hepatocarcinogenesis. Cancer Lett. 2014;346:17‐23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Wallace MC, Preen D, Jeffrey GP, Adams LA. The evolving epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: a global perspective. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;9:765‐779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Mittal S, Elserag HB. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: consider the population. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2013;47:S2‐S6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Elserag HB. Hepatocellular carcinoma: an epidemiologic view. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2002;35:S72‐S78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Hoeijmakers JH. Genome maintenance mechanisms for preventing cancer. Nature. 2001;411:366‐374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Walker GC. Inducible DNA repair systems. Annu Rev Biochem. 1985;54:425‐457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Spry M. DNA repair pathways and hereditary cancer susceptibility syndromes. Front Biosci. 2007;12:4191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Wright WD, Shah SS, Heyer WD. Homologous recombination and the repair of DNA double‐strand breaks. J Biol Chem. 2018;293:10524‐10535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Bell JC, Kowalczykowski SC. Mechanics and single‐molecule interrogation of DNA recombination. Annu Rev Biochem. 2016;85:193‐226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Moynahan ME, Jasin M. Mitotic homologous recombination maintains genomic stability and suppresses tumorigenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2010;11:196‐207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Jain S, Sugawara N, Lydeard J, Vaze M, Tanguy Le Gac N, Haber Je. A recombination execution checkpoint regulates the choice of homologous recombination pathway during DNA double‐strand break repair. Genes Dev. 2009;23:291‐303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Yang SF, Chang CW, Wei RJ, Shiue YL, Wang SN, Yeh YT. Involvement of DNA damage response pathways in hepatocellular carcinoma. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:153867. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Tarsounas M, Muñoz Purificacíon, Claas A, et al. Telomere maintenance requires the RAD51D recombination/repair protein. Cell. 2004;117:337‐347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Thacker J. The RAD51 gene family, genetic instability and cancer. Cancer Lett. 2005;219:125‐135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Loveday C, Turnbull C, Ramsay E, et al. Germline mutations in RAD51D confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet. 2011;43:879‐882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Pelttari LM, Kiiski J, Nurminen R, et al. A finnish founder mutation in RAD51D: analysis in breast, ovarian, prostate, and colorectal cancer. J Med Genet. 2012;49:429‐432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Wickramanyake A, Bernier G, Pennil C, et al. Loss of function germline mutations in RAD51D in women with ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127:552‐555. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Thompson ER, Rowley SM, Sawyer S, et al. Analysis of RAD51D in ovarian cancer patients and families with a history of ovarian or breast cancer. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e54772. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Baker JL, Schwab RB, Wallace AM, Madlensky L. Breast cancer in a RAD51D mutation carrier: case report and review of the literature. Clin Breast Cancer. 2015;15:e71‐e75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Song H, Dicks E, Ramus SJ, et al. Contribution of germline mutations in the RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D genes to ovarian cancer in the population. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2901‐2907. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Sánchez‐Bermúdez AI, Sarabia‐Meseguer MD, García‐Aliaga Á, et al. Mutational analysis of RAD51C and RAD51D genes in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families from Murcia (southeastern Spain). Eur J Med Genet. 2018;61:355‐361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Dowty JG, Lose F, Jenkins MA, et al. The RAD51D E233G variant and breast cancer risk: population‐based and clinic‐based family studies of Australian women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112:35‐39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Ryan BM. microRNAs in cancer susceptibility. Adv Cancer Res. 2017;135:151‐171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Moszynska A, Gebert M, Collawn JF, Bartoszewski R. SNPs in microRNA target sites and their potential role in human disease. Open Biology. 2017;7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Nicoloso MS, Sun H, Spizzo R, et al. Single‐nucleotide polymorphisms inside microRNA target sites influence tumor susceptibility. Can Res. 2010;70:2789‐2798. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Yu Z, Li Z, Jolicoeur N, et al. Aberrant allele frequencies of the SNPs located in microRNA target sites are potentially associated with human cancers. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:4535‐4541. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Bottai G, Pasculli B, Calin GA, Santarpia L. Targeting the microRNA‐regulating DNA damage/repair pathways in cancer. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2014;14:1667‐1683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Wang Y, Taniguchi T. microRNAs and DNA damage response. Cell Cycle. 2014;12:32‐42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Chowdhury D, Choi YE, Brault ME. Charity begins at home: non‐coding RNA functions in DNA repair. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2013;14:181‐189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Huang J‐w, Wang Y, Dhillon Kk, et al. Systematic screen identifies miRNAs that target RAD51 and RAD51D to enhance chemosensitivity. Mol Cancer Res. 2013;11:1564‐1573. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Bei C, Liu S, Yu X, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in miR‐122 are associated with the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in a southern Chinese population. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:1540201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Tarsounas M, Davies AA, West SC. RAD51 localization and activation following DNA damage. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004;359:87‐93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Krupa R, Synowiec E, Pawlowska E, et al. Polymorphism of the homologous recombination repair genes RAD51 and XRCC3 in breast cancer. Exp Mol Pathol. 2009;87:32‐35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Yin M, Liao Z, Huang YJ, et al. Polymorphisms of homologous recombination genes and clinical outcomes of non‐small cell lung cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e20055. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Nowacka‐Zawisza M, Wisnik E, Wasilewski A, et al. Polymorphisms of homologous recombination RAD51, RAD51B, XRCC2, and XRCC3 genes and the risk of prostate cancer. Anal Cell Pathol. 2015;2015:828646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Braybrooke JP, Spink KG, Thacker J, Hickson ID. The RAD51 family member, RAD51L3, is a DNA‐stimulated ATPase that forms a complex with XRCC2. J Biol Chem. 2000;275:29100‐29106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Farazi TA, Hoell JI, Morozov P, Tuschl T. microRNAs in human cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2013;774:1‐20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Pierluigi G, Francesca L, Matteo F, et al. Protective role of mir-155 in breast cancer through rad51 targeting impairs homologous recombination after irradiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2014;111:4536. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. He M, Zhou W, Li C, Micrornas GM. DNA damage response, and cancer treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Rodriguez‐Lopez R, Osorio A, Ribas G, et al. The variant E233G of the RAD51D gene could be a low‐penetrance allele in high‐risk breast cancer families without BRCA1/2 mutations. Int J Cancer. 2004;110:845‐849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Nadkarni A, Rajesh P, Ruch RJ, Pittman DL. Cisplatin resistance conferred by the RAD51D (E233G) genetic variant is dependent upon p53 status in human breast carcinoma cell lines. Mol Carcinog. 2009;48:586‐591. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Smiraldo PG, Gruver AM, Osborn JC, Pittman DL. Extensive chromosomal instability in RAD51D‐deficient mouse cells. Can Res. 2005;65:2089‐2096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Vogelstein B, Lane D, Levine AJ. Surfing the p53 network. Nature. 2000;408:307‐310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Yoon D, Wang Y, Stapleford K, Wiesmuller L, Chen J. P53 inhibits strand exchange and replication fork regression promoted by human RAD51. J Mol Biol. 2004;336:639‐654. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Linke SP, Sengupta S, Khabie N, et al. P53 interacts with hRAD51 and hRAD54, and directly modulates homologous recombination. Can Res. 2003;63:2596‐2605. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

 


Articles from Cancer Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES