J Cancer 2017; 8(15):2944-2949. doi:10.7150/jca.20330
Associations of Epstein-Barr Virus DNA in PBMCs and the Subtypes with Breast Cancer Risk
1. School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China;
2. Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou, 510623, China;
3. The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China;
4. The Second Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China;
5. The Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510080, China;
6. The Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510630, China.
* These authors contributed equally to this paper.
Zhang W, Wang MY, Wei XL, Lin Y, Su FX, Xie XM, Tang LY, Ren ZF. Associations of Epstein-Barr Virus DNA in PBMCs and the Subtypes with Breast Cancer Risk. J Cancer 2017; 8(15):2944-2949. doi:10.7150/jca.20330. Available from http://www.jcancer.org/v08p2944.htm
Objective: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) has been found to be implicated in the development of breast cancer. The purpose of the present study was to identify the associations of EBV DNA and the subtypes in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the risk of breast cancer.
Material and Methods: A case-control study with 671 breast cancer cases and 859 age-matched controls was conducted in Guangzhou, China. Face-to-face interviews were performed and blood samples were collected immediately after admission to the hospital for patients or after the interview for controls. EBV DNA in PBMCs and the subtypes were detected using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and restricted fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP). IgA antibodies against EBV VCA-p18 and EBNA-1 were examined using commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was applied to evaluate the associations of the DNA positivity and subtypes of EBV with the risk of breast cancer.
Results: Among the 1530 subjects, 164 cases (24.4 %) and 206 controls (24.0 %) were positive for EBV DNA in PBMCs and no significant difference occurred between cases and controls. The presence of EBV DNA was related to the positivity of EBV IgA antibodies. Of the DNA positive samples, 71 cases and 109 controls for F/f subtype and 58 cases and 112 controls for C/D subtype were successfully obtained. The D subtype was associated with an increased breast cancer risk compared with the C subtype [OR (95% CI): 2.86 (1.25~6.53)]. We did not find an association of the F/f polymorphism with breast cancer risk.
Conclusions: The present study suggested that the presence of EBV DNA in PBMCs may not be an appropriate biomarker for breast cancer risk. The subtype D of EBV was likely to be related to breast tumorigenesis.
Keywords: EBV DNA, Subtypes, PBMCs, Breast cancer.