LIPG endothelial lipase and breast cancer risk by subtypes

TítuloLIPG endothelial lipase and breast cancer risk by subtypes
AutoresManuela Gago-Dominguez, Carmen M. Redondo, Manuel Calaza, Marcos Matabuena, Maria A. Bermudez, Roman Perez-Fernandez, María Torres-Español, Ángel Carracedo & J. Esteban Castelao
TipoArtículo de revista
Fonte Scientific Reports, Nature, Vol. 11, pp. 10436-1 - 10436-10 , 2021.
RankProvisionally ranked Q1 in Multidisciplinary by SJR 2019
ISSN2045-2322
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89669-4
AbstractExperimental data showed that endothelial lipase (LIPG) is a crucial player in breast cancer. However, very limited data exists on the role of LIPG on the risk of breast cancer in humans. We examined the LIPG-breast cancer association within our population-based case–control study from Galicia, Spain, BREOGAN (BREast Oncology GAlicia Network). Plasma LIPG and/or OxLDL were measured on 114 breast cancer cases and 82 controls from our case–control study, and were included in the present study. The risk of breast cancer increased with increasing levels of LIPG (multivariable OR for the highest category (95% CI) 2.52 (1.11–5.81), P-trend = 0.037). The LIPG-breast cancer association was restricted to Pre-menopausal breast cancer (Multivariable OR for the highest LIPG category (95% CI) 4.76 (0.94–28.77), P-trend = 0.06, and 1.79 (0.61–5.29), P-trend = 0.372, for Pre-menopausal and Post-menopausal breast cancer, respectively). The LIPG-breast cancer association was restricted to Luminal A breast cancers (Multivariable OR for the highest LIPG category (95% CI) 3.70 (1.42–10.16), P-trend = 0.015, and 2.05 (0.63–7.22), P-trend = 0.311, for Luminal A and non-Luminal A breast cancers, respectively). Subset analysis only based on HER2 receptor indicated that the LIPG-breast cancer relationship was restricted to HER2-negative breast cancers (Multivariable OR for the highest LIPG category (95% CI) 4.39 (1.70–12.03), P-trend = 0.012, and 1.10 (0.28–4.32), P-trend = 0.745, for HER2-negative and HER2-positive tumors, respectively). The LIPG-breast cancer association was restricted to women with high total cholesterol levels (Multivariable OR for the highest LIPG category (95% CI) 6.30 (2.13–20.05), P-trend = 0.018, and 0.65 (0.11–3.28), P-trend = 0.786, among women with high and low cholesterol levels, respectively). The LIPG-breast cancer association was also restricted to non-postpartum breast cancer (Multivariable OR for the highest LIPG category (95% CI) 3.83 (1.37–11.39), P-trend = 0.003, and 2.35 (0.16–63.65), P-trend = 0.396, for non-postpartum and postpartum breast cancer, respectively), although we lacked precision. The LIPG-breast cancer association was more pronounced among grades II and III than grade I breast cancers (Multivariable ORs for the highest category of LIPG (95% CI) 2.73 (1.02–7.69), P-trend = 0.057, and 1.90 (0.61–6.21), P-trend = 0.170, for grades II and III, and grade I breast cancers, respectively). No association was detected for OxLDL levels and breast cancer (Multivariable OR for the highest versus the lowest category (95% CI) 1.56 (0.56–4.32), P-trend = 0.457).