Impact of <i>XRCC2</i> Arg188His Polymorphism on Cancer Susceptibility: A Meta-Analysis

<div><p>Background</p><p>Association between the single nucleotide polymorphism rs3218536 (known as Arg188His) located in the X-ray repair cross complementing group 2 (<i>XRCC2</i>) gene and cancer susceptibility has been widely investigated. However, results thus far have remained controversial. A meta-analysis was performed to identify the impact of this polymorphism on cancer susceptibility.</p><p>Methods</p><p>PubMed and Embase databases were searched systematically until September 7, 2013 to obtain all the records evaluating the association between the <i>XRCC2</i> Arg188His polymorphism and the risk of all types of cancers. We used the odds ratio (OR) as measure of effect, and pooled the data in a Mantel-Haenszel weighed random-effects meta-analysis to provide a summary estimate of the impact of this polymorphism on breast cancer, ovarian cancer and other cancers. All the analyses were carried out in STATA 12.0.</p><p>Results</p><p>With 30868 cases and 38656 controls, a total of 45 case-control studies from 26 publications were eventually included in our meta-analysis. No significant association was observed between the <i>XRCC2</i> Arg188His polymorphism and breast cancer susceptibility (dominant model: OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.86–1.04, P = 0.232). However, a significant impact of this polymorphism was detected on decreased ovarian cancer risk (dominant model: OR = 0.83, 95%CI = 0.73–0.95, P = 0.007). In addition, we found this polymorphism was associated with increased upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancer susceptibility (dominant model: OR = 1.51, 95%CI = 1.04–2.20, P = 0.032).</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>The Arg188His polymorphism might play different roles in carcinogenesis of various cancer types. Current evidence did not suggest that this polymorphism was directly associated with breast cancer susceptibility. However, this polymorphism might contribute to decreased gynecological cancer risk and increased UADT cancer risk. More preclinical and epidemiological studies were still imperative for further evaluation.</p>