Skip to main content
Download PDF

The association of E2F1 and E2F2 single nucleotide polymorphisms with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma pathomorphological features

BMC Cancer volume 24, Article number: 214 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) is one of the most common types of cancer in the upper respiratory tract. It is well-known that it has a high mortality rate and poor prognosis in advanced stages. There are well-known risk factors for LSCC, though new specific and prognostic blood-based markers for LSCC development and prognosis are essential. The current study aimed to evaluate the impact of four different single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), E2F1 (rs3213183 and rs3213180) and E2F2 (rs2075993 and rs3820028), on LSCC development, morphological features, and patient 5-year survival rate.

Methods

A total of 200 LSCC patients and 200 controls were included in this study; both groups were matched by age and sex. In the present study, we analyzed four single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the genes E2F1 (rs3213183 and rs3213180) and E2F2 (rs2075993 and rs3820028) and evaluated their associations with the risk of LSCC development, its clinical and morphological manifestation, and patients 5-year survival rate. Genotyping was carried out using RT-PCR.

Results

None of the analyzed SNPs showed a direct association with LSCC development. E2F2 rs2075993 G allele carriers (OR = 4.589, 95% CI 1.050-20.051, p = 0.043) and rs3820028 A allele carriers (OR = 4.750, 95% CI 1.088–20.736, p = 0.038) had a statistically significantly higher risk for poor differentiated or undifferentiated LSCC than non-carriers. E2F1 rs3213180 GC heterozygotes were found to have a 3.7-fold increased risk for lymph node involvement (OR = 3.710, 95% CI 1.452–9.479, p = 0.006). There was no statistically significant association between investigated SNPs and patient 5-year survival rate.

Conclusions

The present study indicates that E2F2 rs2075993 and rs3820028 impact LSCC differentiation, whereas E2F1 rs3213180 - on lymph node involvement.

Peer Review reports

Background

Laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) is a type of cancer that affects the larynx (voice box) and is one of the most common types of cancer that affects the upper part of the respiratory system. LSCC often has a high mortality rate and a poor prognosis for patients, making it a severe and potentially life-threatening condition. In 2020, 184,615 new cases of LSCC were diagnosed, and 99,840 patients died from this cancer worldwide [1]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the incidence of laryngeal cancer will rise from 184,615 in 2020 to 284,000 in 2040, with a mortality rate increasing from 52.4 to 64.5% by 2040 [2]. It is well-known that laryngeal cancer is more prevalent in males than in females, 3.6/100 000 and 0.49/100 000, respectively [2]. This is primarily associated with ill habits, such as smoking and high alcohol consumption, that males tend to have more often than females [3,4,5]. Although tobacco and alcohol consumption are of great significance in LSCC carcinogenesis, only a tiny part of smokers and drinkers are diagnosed with LSCC [6]. This suggests that environmental and genetic factors may contribute to LSCC development. This forces attention to blood-based genetic biomarkers to speed up diagnostics and develop new treatment options for LSCC patients [7]. Several studies have demonstrated the importance of specific gene variants, particularly in combination with substances such as alcohol and tobacco, that play a role in the development and prognosis of LSCC [7,8,9,10].

E2F1 and E2F2 are transcription factors that belong to the E2F family of proteins. These proteins play a critical role in regulating the cell cycle and are involved in controlling cell proliferation and cell death [11, 12], both processes being essential in carcinogenesis. E2F1 is found to play a role in a variety of cancer types, including breast [13], gastric [14], and colorectal cancer [15], and has been shown to promote cell proliferation and inhibit apoptosis. E2F2, on the other hand, has been shown to have a suppressive effect on cell proliferation and to promote apoptosis in specific cancer types [16, 17].

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) are potential markers for individual susceptibility to the disease. Analysis of SNP might be critical for the early diagnosis, prognosis, and individualized, targeted cancer treatment [18]. A limited number of studies in the literature have investigated the role of E2F1 and E2F2 SNPs in head and neck cancer. Earlier published studies suggest that specific SNPs may be associated with an increased risk of head and neck cancer [19,20,21]. However, there are no studies available on the effect of E2F1 and E2F2 SNPs on LSCC phenotype. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate four SNPs in E2F1 (rs3213183 and rs3213180) and E2F2 (rs2075993 and rs3820028) genes and to determine their associations with the risk of LSCC development and their impact on cancer clinical and morphological manifestation and patients 5-year survival rate.

Methods

LSCC group

A thorough otorhinolaryngological examination with flexible endoscopy and/or video laryngostroboscopy was performed for all LSCC patients at the outpatient clinics of the Department of Otorhinolaryngology at Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (LUHS), Kaunas, Lithuania. Direct microlaryngoscopy with biopsy was performed for all patients. The diagnosis of LSCC was confirmed by histopathological testing at the Department of Pathology, LUHS. The final diagnosis of LSCC was based on clinical data and the results of histological examination and laryngeal and neck computed tomography (CT) with contrast enhancement or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The staging of LSCC was done following the Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancers Classification, Version 2.2020, accepted by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) [22]. Patients diagnosed with/or suspected of having other types of cancer and individuals under 18 years of age were excluded from this study. The exclusion of female participants from this study was based on the fact that LSCC is more prevalent in men [2], and the incidence of LSCC in women is extremely low, with only a few cases reported nationwide annually. Clinical data were obtained through personal interviews during counseling and by reviews of patients’ case records. For SNP analyses peripheral venous blood samples were collected.

In total, a group of 200 men who were diagnosed with LSCC were consequently enrolled in this retrospective case-control study. Information about tumor size (T), nodal metastasis (N), distant metastasis to other organs (M), clinical stage (ST), and cancer cell differentiation grade (G) was collected. We divided T, N, M stages, ST and G into two groups: T1-2 (low stage) versus (VS) T3-4 (high stage), N0 (lymph nodes without metastasis) VS N1-3 (lymph nodes with metastasis), M0 (no distant metastasis) VS M1 (with distant metastasis), ST 1–2 (early stage) VS ST 3–4 (advanced stage) and G1-2 (well/moderately differentiated cancers) VS G3-4 (poor/undifferentiated cancers) [23, 24].

Reference group

The reference group consisted of 200 men recruited during an annual health checkup in an outpatient clinic. Patients who were treated for cancer or were suspected to have any oncologic disease - were excluded from the study.

The LSCC patients and reference groups were matched by age (Table 1) and sex (males only). The study was approved by the Kaunas Regional Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (authorization protocols No. BE-2-37, No. BE-2-10, and No. P1-BE-2-10/2014), and informed consent was obtained from all the participants prior to inclusion in the study.

Selection of SNPs

The investigated SNPs were selected according to the following criteria: >5% minimal allele frequency (MAF) in the 1000 Genomes or HapMap databases (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/) and previously defined associations with head and neck or other types of cancer susceptibility [25,26,27].

Sample size

To determine the appropriate sample size for this study, the formula n = Z2×p×(1 − p)/E2 was used, where n represents the necessary sample size, Z is the 95% confidence level, p is the minimal allele frequency, and E is the margin of error. The minimal allele frequency was obtained from the SNP database and ranged from 11 to 34%. The margin of error was set at 8%. Based on these parameters, the sample size was calculated to be between 60 and 164 patients.

Genotyping of SNPs

The genotyping of E2F1 rs3213183 and rs3213180, and E2F2 rs2075993 and rs3820028 was carried out at the Oncology Research Laboratory of Oncology Institute at LUHS. Venous blood samples for DNA extraction were collected in ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid tubes. According to the manufacturer’s recommendations, genomic DNA from peripheral blood leucocytes was extracted using a DNA purification kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). SNP rs3213183 and rs3213180 in E2F1, and rs2075993 and rs3820028 in E2F2 genes were estimated by using commercially available TaqMan (Thermo Fisher Scientific Baltics, Vilnius, Lithuania) genotyping kits using real–time PCR (RT-PCR). Statistical analysis was performed using IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Quality control of genotyping

5% (5%) of randomly chosen samples were repetitively analyzed to confirm the results of initial genotyping.

Survival rate

The LSCC group data about the 5-year survival rate and the cause of death were collected from the Lithuanian State Register of Death Cases and Their Causes.

Statistical analysis

Differences in genotype frequencies among the groups were evaluated by the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) using a chi-square test (p > 0.05). The associations between SNP genotypic and allelic models and pathomorphological characteristics were analyzed using Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. Univariate logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate each SNP’s impact on pathomorphological characteristics and determine whether it increases or decreases the risk. The multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the adjusted ORs for statistically significant results in the univariate logistic regression. For multiple comparisons Bonferroni correction was applied. The difference was considered statistically significant when the p-value was less than 0.05 (Bonferroni-corrected p < 0.05). Relationships between studied SNPs and overall survival (OS) were assessed for survival analysis. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using log-rank, Breslow, and Tarone-Ware tests.

Results

The study included 200 male patients with LSCC, with a median age of 64.5 years (49–85). Additionally, 200 healthy male subjects with a median age of 65.5 years (50–75) were included as controls. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in age between the case and control groups (p = 0.073). Table 1 provides detailed demographic characteristics of the entire study population. The enrollment process started in 2016, and the cases enrolled in the study are from 2016 until 2023. The range of follow-up time was from 1 to 60 months. The mean average of the follow-up time was 39 months, and the median of the follow-up time was 30 months.

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the study population
Full size table

The distribution of the examined SNPs E2F1 rs3213183, E2F2 rs2075993, and rs3820028 was in accordance with the HWE (p > 0.05). Although E2F1 rs3213180 did not adhere to the HWE (p = 0.019), we chose not to exclude this SNP from the subsequent analysis. It was determined that there were no significant differences between the distribution of analyzed SNP genotypes and alleles in LSCC and control groups (Table 2). The results suggest that the analyzed SNPs are not associated with the increased risk for LSCC development.

Table 2 SNP genotype and allele distribution in LSCC and control groups
Full size table

The subsequent analysis of the LSCC study group revealed statistically significant associations between E2F2 rs2075993, E2F2 rs3820028 polymorphisms, and LSCC differentiation grade (p = 0.031 and 0.032, respectively). Furthermore, a significant association was found between the E2F1 rs3213180 polymorphism and tumor size (T) (p = 0.039), lymph node involvement (N) (p = 0.005), and LSCC clinical stage (ST) (p = 0.008) (Table 3). That was followed by univariate logistic regression analysis. Only statistically significant results are mentioned below. It was determined that individuals carrying the A allele of E2F2 rs3820028 (OR = 4.750, 95% CI 1.088–20.736, p = 0.038) and individuals carrying the G allele of E2F2 rs2075993 (OR = 4.589, 95% CI 1.050-20.051, p = 0.043) had an increased risk for poorly differentiated or undifferentiated LSCC compared to the non-carriers. Statistically significant results were observed in the univariate logistic regression model for E2F1 rs3213180 GC heterozygotes, impacting lymph node involvement (OR = 3.710, 95% CI 1.452–9.479, p = 0.006) (Table 3).

Table 3 SNPs association with pathomorphological LSCC parameters (bold text highlighting statistically significant results)
Full size table

When the results were adjusted for other characteristics such as patient age, tumor size, and histological grade in multivariate logistic regression analysis, rs3213180 GC genotype remained statistically significantly associated with unfavorable outcomes related to nodal metastasis (OR = 4.268, 95% CI 1.310-13.905, p = 0.016) (Table 4).

Table 4 Impact of rs3213180 on nodal metastasis. Multivariate logistic regression model (bold text highlighting statistically significant results)
Full size table

LSCC patient 5-year survival was measured by log-rank, Breslow, and Tarone-Ware tests. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan–Meier method. There were no significant differences in the survival of patients with different genotypes (Supplementary Materials: Figure S1– S4, Table S1-4). Our data suggest that the analyzed SNPs do not contribute to the 5-year survival rate of LSCC patients.

Discussion

The E2F1 and E2F2 genes are both members of the E2F gene group. They are transcriptional factors that are well-known to affect cell fate and govern cancer development [11] by regulating cell proliferative and antiproliferative processes [12]. Although the exact mechanism underlying E2F-related tumor susceptibility is not fully understood with conflicting data available [26, 28, 29], E2F1 and E2F2 SNPs have been shown to influence the risk of various cancers such as head and neck squamous cell carcinoma [19, 30, 31], breast [32], colon and colorectal [16, 33, 34], gastric [35], ovarian [36] and other types of cancers [30]. However, as far as we know, no studies have shown the effect of polymorphisms in E2F1 and E2F2 genes on LSCC development or their impact on LSCC pathomorphological parameters.

This study examined E2F1 rs3213183, rs3213180, and E2F2 rs2075993, rs3820028 SNPs in patients with LSCC. Three of the mentioned SNPs are known to be located in the 3’untranslated region (UTR) (rs3213180, rs2075993, rs3820028) and one (rs3213183) in 5’UTR and were shown to have an impact on the head and neck or other types of cancer development [19, 25,26,27, 30]. Various studies have demonstrated that SNPs in the 5’UTR region can affect gene transcription and messenger RNA (mRNA) translation efficiency, resulting in altered protein levels. It is also known that SNPs in the 3’UTR, targeted by micro RNAs (miRNA), can affect RNA translation in this way, altering gene expression [37]. These mechanisms are widely recognized as potential for individual cancer risk [26, 37, 38].

The results of our study showed no statistically significant differences in genotype distribution between LSCC and reference groups. To our knowledge, the association between E2F1 rs3213183, rs3213180, E2F2 rs2075993, rs3820028, and LSCC has never been investigated. However, the effect of SNPs in the genes, as mentioned earlier, was analyzed in the head and neck cancers group. Lu et al., in their study, found that the combined effect of different SNPs may play a role in head and neck cancer development. They demonstrated a higher impact of SNPs on cancer development in younger male patients without smoking/alcohol consumption and with family cancer history in first-degree relatives [19]. It is important to mention that the study by Lu et al. demonstrated that a single SNP may not play a significant role in mediating personal risk for head and neck cancer, which concurs with our results.

The multifactorial etiopathogenesis of LSCC is well-known [39]. It is important to stress that different SNPs may contribute to various aspects of carcinogenesis either by altering the risk of cancer development, modifying the tumor phenotype, or affecting the cause of the disease. Various genetic alterations have been shown to impact the development and progression of LSCC in other studies [40,41,42,43,44]. Although the investigated SNPs did not affect LSCC development or patient 5-year survival, several significant associations with tumor phenotype were determined. As mentioned earlier, we demonstrated the importance of the SNPs on LSCC nodal metastasis and differentiation grade– the features associated with a more aggressive LSCC course. These findings might be helpful in treatment tactic selection in LSCC patients based on the individual genetic profile. It is worth mentioning that underlying biological mechanisms of the already identified genetic associations in other studies are still not fully understood and conflicting [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49], indicating the importance of further research. Cancer researchers are looking for an ideal biomarker that would help diagnose cancer, detect metastases, assess tumor spread, and detect residual disease– though no such marker has been found by any of the research [50]. Despite this, data from our research provides new insights into LSCC pathogenesis and may be used in the future.

A recent study by Chen et al. found that E2F2 rs3820028 and E2F2 rs2075993 were associated with the risk of head and neck cancer development in the Chinese population [30]. Although we reached different conclusions based on our data, this difference might be because our study group included only a pure cohort of male LSCC patients. In contrast, Chen et al. investigated the whole group of head and neck cancers. Furthermore, our sample size was smaller, whereas Chen et al. investigated 679 patient and control pairs. Additionally, the frequencies of SNPs vary in distant populations, which might also contribute to the differences mentioned above.

There is a lack of literature on associations between E2F1 and E2F2 SNPs and LSCC pathomorphological characteristics. Our findings showed that E2F2 rs2075993 G allele carriers and rs3820028 A allele carriers had a 4.5-fold and 4.7-fold higher risk for poorly differentiated or undifferentiated LSCC, respectively. The results suggest that these SNPs located in 3’UTR have a significant impact on LSCC differentiation that has not yet been demonstrated in the other studies. Furthermore, it is essential to mention that rs2075993 G > A alleles and rs3820028 A > G alleles are partially linked as GA and AG haplotypes were determined in the majority of our LSCC patients (in 199 out of 200).

A study by Yaoxu et al. investigated the expression of E2F genes in head and neck cancer patients and found that the expression levels of E2F1, E2F2, E2F5, E2F6, E2F7, and E2F8 in the N2 and N3 stages were significantly higher than those in the N0 and N1 stages [47]. Our study revealed that the E2F1 rs3213180 GC genotype was significantly related to the development of lymph node metastasis in both univariate and multivariate analyses. The heterozygotes of rs3213180 had a 4-fold higher risk for nodal metastasis (univariate analysis: OR = 3.710, 95% CI 1.452–9.479, p = 0.006; multivariate analysis: OR = 4.268, 95% CI 1.310-13.905, p = 0.016) and the findings are consistent with results of Yaoxu et al.. Furthermore, rs3213180 SNP was earlier proven to alter E2F1 gene expression [26]. This suggests that E2F1 rs3213180, located in 3’UTR, plays a pivotal role in lymph node metastasis, resulting in a more aggressive LSCC phenotype predisposing patients to a higher clinical stage (ST).

The main strength of this study was the collection of a pure LSCC cohort, which was matched by age and sex with controls. Furthermore, all the samples were collected in a single hospital unit using a unified protocol for patient treatment, sample handling, and investigation. Moreover, significant findings of E2F2 rs2075993, rs3820028 involvement in LSCC differentiation, and the impact of E2F1 rs3213180 on lymph node metastasis were determined. It is worth mentioning that most of the earlier published studies provided data under the unified head and neck squamous cell carcinoma term [51]. In this way, all malignant tumors from different localizations (oropharyngeal, nasopharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, laryngeal, and sinonasal regions) were investigated as one disease. These studies did not consider that these malignancies have different etiologies, biological and clinical behaviors, prognoses, and distinct genetic predispositions [52, 53]. Moreover, we believe that investigating different localizations of head and neck cancers as one disease may leave possible meaningful associations for specific cancer types undetected. Therefore, pure cohort studies of single-location cancers are essential in head and neck cancer research.

Certain limitations of the present study must be addressed. A larger sample size could be beneficial. Additionally, the involvement of environmental factors should be considered - smoking and alcohol consumption habits were not investigated. However, this is a targeted task for future research.

The broad range of patient follow-up times (1 to 60 months) creates potential bias in drawing conclusions from our data. The mean average (39 months) and median (30 months) provide some general tendencies. However, due to the presence of a small number of patients with significantly extended follow-up times and a relatively low number of observed deaths (66 patients, comprising 33%), there is a possibility of skewness [54]. Therefore, conducting additional studies with extended follow-up periods is crucial to eliminate any possible bias and obtain conclusive data about the outcomes and patient 5-year survival rate.

Conclusions

This study presents valuable insight into LSCC carcinogenesis as E2F2 rs2075993 and rs3820028 were proven to play a role in LSCC differentiation, and E2F1 rs3213180 in lymph node metastasis. The results suggest that the analyzed SNPs (E2F1 rs3213183, rs3213180, E2F2 rs2075993, and rs3820028) are not associated with an increased risk of LSCC development. The genotypic distribution of the mentioned SNPs does not influence the 5-year survival rate of LSCC patients, though further studies are needed with extended follow-up periods to draw definitive conclusions.

Data availability

The datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

LSCC:

Laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma

WHO:

World Health Organization

SNP:

single nucleotide polymorphism

RT:

PCR-real-time PCR

LUHS:

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences

CT:

Computed tomography

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

NCCN:

National Comprehensive Cancer Network

T:

tumor size

N:

nodal metastasis

M:

distant metastasis to other organs

ST:

clinical stage

G:

cancer cell differentiation grade

VS:

versus

MAF:

minimal allele frequency

SPSS:

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

HWE:

Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium

OR:

odds ratio

CI:

confidence interval

OS:

overall survival

UTR:

untranslated region

mRNA:

messenger RNA

miRNA:

micro-RNA

References

  1. World Health Organization. Cancer Tomorrow. 2020 [cited 2023 Feb 23]. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/14-Larynx-fact-sheet.pdf.

  2. World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Estimated number of deaths from 2020 to 2040, both sexes, age (0–85+), 2020. [cited 2023 Feb 20]. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/tomorrow/en/dataviz/bubbles?sexes=0&mode=population&group_populations=0&multiple_cancers=1&cancers=39_14&group_cancers=1.

  3. Di Credico G, Polesel J, Dal Maso L, Pauli F, Torelli N, Luce D, et al. Alcohol drinking and head and neck cancer risk: the joint effect of intensity and duration. Br J Cancer. 2020;123(9):1456–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-01031-z. Epub 2020 Aug 24. PMID: 32830199; PMCID: PMC7592048.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sterba KR, Garrett-Mayer E, Carpenter MJ, Tooze JA, Hatcher JL, Sullivan C, et al. Smoking status and symptom burden in surgical head and neck cancer patients. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(1):127–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26159. Epub 2016 Jul 9. PMID: 27392821; PMCID: PMC5177454.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ramsey T, Guo E, Svider PF, Lin H, Syeda S, Raza SN, et al. Laryngeal cancer: global socioeconomic trends in disease burden and smoking habits. Laryngoscope. 2018;128(9):2039–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.27068. Epub 2018 Mar 6. PMID: 29508408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Maasland DH, van den Brandt PA, Kremer B, Goldbohm RA, Schouten LJ. Alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking and the risk of subtypes of head-neck cancer: results from the Netherlands Cohort Study. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:187. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-187. PMID: 24629046; PMCID: PMC4004328.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Cornean CI, Cosgarea M, Cătană A, Mogoantă CA, Necula V, Maniu AA. Do we know enough about the genetic involvement in laryngeal cancer susceptibility and prognostic outcome? Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2019;60(2):353–67. PMID: 31658308.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Uloza V, Tamauskaite T, Vilkeviciute A, Pasvenskaite A, Liutkevicius V, Liutkeviciene R. Determination of SIRT1 rs12778366, FGFR2rs2981582, STAT3 rs744166, and RAGErs1800625 Single Gene Polymorphisms in Patients with Laryngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Dis Markers. 2019; 2019:3907232. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3907232. PMID: 31781300; PMCID: PMC6875326.

  9. Vaiciulis P, Liutkeviciene R, Liutkevicius V, Vilkeviciute A, Gedvilaite G, Uloza V. Association of SIRT1 single gene nucleotide polymorphisms and serum SIRT1 levels with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma patient survival rate. Cancer Biomark. 2022;34(2):175–88. https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-210264. PMID: 34719479; PMCID: PMC9198736.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Insodaite R, Liutkevicius V, Uloza V, Solovejute R, Smalinskiene A. Association Between MMP8 Gene Polymorphisms and Laryngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2020;40(4):2003–2009. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14156. PMID: 32234890.

  11. Polager S, Ginsberg D. p53 and E2f: partners in life and death. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9(10):738– 48. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2718. PMID: 19776743.

  12. Polager S, Ginsberg D. E2F - at the crossroads of life and death. Trends Cell Biol. 2008;18(11):528–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2008.08.003. Epub 2008 Sep 18. PMID: 18805009.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zheng X, Huang M, Xing L, Yang R, Wang X, Jiang R, et al. The circRNA circSEPT9 mediated by E2F1 and EIF4A3 facilitates the carcinogenesis and development of triple-negative breast cancer. Mol Cancer. 2020;19(1):73. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-020-01183-9. PMID: 32264877; PMCID: PMC7137343.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Lin X, Han T, Xia Q, Cui J, Zhuo M, Liang Y, et al. CHPF promotes gastric cancer tumorigenesis through the activation of E2F1. Cell Death Dis. 2021;12(10):876. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-021-04148-y. PMID: 34564711; PMCID: PMC8464597.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Jing Z, Liu Q, He X, Jia Z, Xu Z, Yang B, et al. NCAPD3 enhances Warburg effect through c-myc and E2F1 and promotes the occurrence and progression of colorectal cancer. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2022;41(1):198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13046-022-02412-3. PMID: 35689245; PMCID: PMC9188166.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Shang Y, Zhang Y, Liu J, Chen L, Yang X, Zhu Z, et al. Decreased E2F2 expression correlates with poor prognosis and Immune infiltrates in patients with colorectal Cancer. J Cancer. 2022;13(2):653–68. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.61415. PMID: 35069909; PMCID: PMC8771517.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen L, Yu JH, Lu ZH, Zhang W. E2F2 induction in related to cell proliferation and poor prognosis in non-small cell lung carcinoma. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(9):10545–54. PMID: 26617764; PMCID: PMC4637579.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Li H, Guo J, Cheng G, Wei Y, Liu S, Qi Y, et al. Identification and validation of SNP-Containing genes with Prognostic Value in Gastric Cancer via Integrated Bioinformatics Analysis. Front Oncol. 2021;11:564296. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.564296. PMID: 33987081; PMCID: PMC8112818.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Lu M, Liu Z, Yu H, Wang LE, Li G, Sturgis EM, et al. Combined effects of E2F1 and E2F2 polymorphisms on risk and early onset of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Mol Carcinog. 2012;51(Suppl 1):E132–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/mc.21882. Epub 2012 Feb 17. PMID: 22344756; PMCID: PMC3370129.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Li Y, Sturgis EM, Zhu L, Cao X, Wei Q, Zhang H, et al. E2F transcription factor 2 variants as predictive biomarkers for recurrence risk in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx. Mol Carcinog. 2017;56(4):1335–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/mc.22595. Epub 2017 Jan 2. PMID: 27864908; PMCID: PMC6036627.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Gingerich MA, Smith JD, Michmerhuizen NL, Ludwig M, Devenport S, Matovina C, et al. Comprehensive review of genetic factors contributing to head and neck squamous cell carcinoma development in low-risk, nontraditional patients. Head Neck. 2018;40(5):943–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.25057. Epub 2018 Feb 10. PMID: 29427520; PMCID: PMC5912962.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Pfister DG, Spencer S, Adelstein D, Adkins D, Anzai Y, Brizel DM et al. Head and Neck Cancers, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2020;18(7):873–898. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2020.0031. PMID: 32634781.

  23. Yang T, Li S, Liu J, Yin D, Yang X, Tang Q. lncRNA-NKILA/NF-κB feedback loop modulates laryngeal cancer cell proliferation, invasion, and radioresistance. Cancer Med. 2018;7(5):2048–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1405. Epub 2018 Mar 23. PMID: 29573243; PMCID: PMC5943486.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Révész M, Oberna F, Slezák A, Ferenczi Ö, Kenessey I, Takácsi-Nagy Z. The characteristics of head and neck squamous cell cancer in young adults: a retrospective single-center study. Pathol Oncol Res. 2023;29:1611123. https://doi.org/10.3389/pore.2023.1611123. PMID: 37168050; PMCID: PMC10164923.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ursu RG, Luchian I, Damian C, Porumb-Andrese E, Ghetu N, Cobzaru RG, et al. Diagnostics of HNSCC patients: an analysis of cell lines and patient-derived xenograft models for personalized Therapeutical Medicine. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022;12(5):1071. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12051071. PMID: 35626227; PMCID: PMC9139588.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yuan Y, Sturgis EM, Zhu L, Lu M, Li Y, Wei Q, et al. A functional variant at the miRNA binding site in E2F1 gene is associated with risk and tumor HPV16 status of oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma. Mol Carcinog. 2017;56(3):1100–6. Epub 2016 Oct 20. PMID: 27677255.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Contrera KJ, Hair BB, Prendes B, Reddy CA, Zimmer DI, Burkey BB, et al. Clinical Versus Pathologic Laryngeal Cancer Staging and the impact of Stage Change on outcomes. Laryngoscope. 2021;131(3):559–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.28924. Epub 2020 Jul 21. PMID: 32692866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kent LN, Leone G. The broken cycle: E2F dysfunction in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2019;19(6):326–338. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-019-0143-7. PMID: 31053804.

  29. Wu T, Wu L. The role and clinical implications of the Retinoblastoma (RB)-E2F pathway in gastric Cancer. Front Oncol. 2021;11:655630. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.655630. PMID: 34136392; PMCID: PMC8201093.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Chen M, Xu WM, Wang GY, Hou YX, Tian TT, Li YQ et al. Genetic variants of cell cycle pathway genes are associated with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the Chinese population. Carcinogenesis. 2021;42(11):1337–1346. https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgab094. PMID: 34643214.

  31. Kassab A, Gupta I, Moustafa AA. Role of E2F transcription factor in oral cancer: recent insight and advancements. Semin Cancer Biol. 2023;92:28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2023.03.004. Epub 2023 Mar 15. PMID: 36924812.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Song L, Li H, Ma RR, Liu S, Zhang GH, Guo XY, et al. E2F1-initiated transcription of PRSS22 promotes breast cancer metastasis by cleaving ANXA1 and activating FPR2/ERK signaling pathway. Cell Death Dis. 2022;13(11):982. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-022-05414-3. PMID: 36414640; PMCID: PMC9681780.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Fang Z, Lin M, Li C, Liu H, Gong C. A comprehensive review of the roles of E2F1 in colon cancer. Am J Cancer Res. 2020;10(3):757–68. PMID: 32266089; PMCID: PMC7136928.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Xu Z, Qu H, Ren Y, Gong Z, Ri HJ, Chen X. An update on the potential roles of E2F family members in Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Manag Res. 2021;13:5509–21. PMID: 34276228; PMCID: PMC8277564.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Li H, Zhao S, Shen L, Wang P, Liu S, Ma Y, et al. E2F2 inhibition induces autophagy via the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway in gastric cancer. Aging. 2021;13(10):13626–43. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.202891. Epub 2021 Apr 21. PMID: 34091441; PMCID: PMC8202834.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Xie L, Li T, Yang LH. E2F2 induces MCM4, CCNE2 and WHSC1 upregulation in ovarian cancer and predicts poor overall survival. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2017;21(9):2150–6. PMID: 28537669.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Deng N, Zhou H, Fan H, Yuan Y. Single nucleotide polymorphisms and cancer susceptibility. Oncotarget. 2017;8(66):110635–49. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.22372. PMID: 29299175; PMCID: PMC5746410.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Ozturk K, Onal MS, Efiloglu O, Nikerel E, Yildirim A, Telci D. Association of 5’UTR polymorphism of secretory phospholipase A2 group IIA (PLA2G2A) gene with prostate cancer metastasis. Gene. 2020;742:144589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2020.144589. Epub 2020 Mar 13. PMID: 32179174.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Steuer CE, El-Deiry M, Parks JR, Higgins KA, Saba NF. An update on larynx cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(1):31–50. Epub 2016 Nov 29. PMID: 27898173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Loyo M, Pai SI. The molecular genetics of laryngeal cancer. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2008;41(4):657– 72, v. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2008.01.019. PMID: 18570952.

  41. Liberale C, Soloperto D, Marchioni A, Monzani D, Sacchetto L. Updates on Larynx Cancer: risk factors and oncogenesis. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(16):12913. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241612913. PMID: 37629093; PMCID: PMC10454133.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Sánchez-Siles M, Pelegrín-Hernández JP, Hellin-Meseguer D, Guerrero-Sánchez Y, Corno-Caparrós A, Cabezas-Herrera, et al. Genotype of null polymorphisms in genes GSTM1, GSTT1, CYP1A1, and CYP1A1*2A (rs4646903 T > C)/CYP1A1*2 C (rs1048943 A > G) in patients with Larynx Cancer in Southeast Spain. Cancers (Basel). 2020;12(9):2478. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12092478. PMID: 32882964; PMCID: PMC7563952.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Yang Y, Zhou J, Wu H. Significance of Cytokeratin-1 single-nucleotide polymorphism and protein level in susceptibility to vocal leukoplakia and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2019;81(2–3):121–9. Epub 2019 May 8. PMID: 31067553.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Pasvenskaite A, Vilkeviciute A, Liutkeviciene R, Gedvilaite G, Liutkevicius V, Uloza V. Associations of IL6 rs1800795, BLK rs13277113, TIMP3 rs9621532, IL1RL1 rs1041973 and IL1RAP rs4624606 single gene polymorphisms with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Gene. 2020;747:144700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2020.144700. Epub 2020 Apr 21. PMID: 32330537.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Liu H, Li G, Sturgis EM, Shete S, Dahlstrom KR, Du M, et al. Genetic variants in CYP2B6 and HSD17B12 associated with risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Int J Cancer. 2022;151(4):553–64. Epub 2022 May 7. PMID: 35404482; PMCID: PMC9203942.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Mosser DM, Zhang X. Interleukin-10: new perspectives on an old cytokine. Immunol Rev. 2008;226:205–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-065X.2008.00706.x. PMID: 19161426; PMCID: PMC2724982.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Li Y, Huang Y, Li B, Yang K. Roles of E2F family members in the diagnosis and prognosis of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. BMC Med Genomics. 2023;16(1):38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12920-023-01470-6. PMID: 36855110; PMCID: PMC9976507.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhang Y, Li W, Wang Y, Wang N. The PLCE1 rs2274223 variant is associated with the risk of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Med Sci. 2020;17(17):2826–30. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.49012. PMID: 33162810; PMCID: PMC7645332.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Lehnerdt GF, Franz P, Winterhoff S, Bankfalvi A, Grehl S, Lang S et al. The GNAS1 T393C polymorphism predicts survival in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx. Laryngoscope. 2008;118(12):2172-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLG.0b013e318185793ds. PMID: 19029852.

  50. Almadori G, Bussu F, Cadoni G, Galli J, Paludetti G, Maurizi M. Molecular markers in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: towards an integrated clinicobiological approach. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(5):683– 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2004.10.031. PMID: 15763643.

  51. Qu Y, Feng J, Wang L, Wang H, Liu H, Sun X, et al. Association between Head and Neck Cancers and polymorphisms 869T/C, 509 C/T, and 915G/C of the transforming growth Factor-β1 gene: a Meta-analysis of case-control studies. Med Sci Monit. 2019;25:8389–402. PMID: 31698408; PMCID: PMC6857353.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Vossen DM, Verhagen CVM, Verheij M, Wessels LFA, Vens C, van den Brekel MWM. Comparative genomic analysis of oral versus laryngeal and pharyngeal cancer. Oral Oncol. 2018;81:35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.04.006. Epub 2018 Apr 13. PMID: 29884412.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Cadoni G, Giraldi L, Petrelli L, Pandolfini M, Giuliani M, Paludetti G, et al. Prognostic factors in head and neck cancer: a 10-year retrospective analysis in a single-institution in Italy. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2017;37(6):458–66. https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-1246. PMID: 28663597; PMCID: PMC5782422.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Goel MK, Khanna P, Kishore J. Understanding survival analysis: Kaplan-Meier estimate. Int J Ayurveda Res. 2010;1(4):274–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7788.76794. PMID: 21455458; PMCID: PMC3059453.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript. The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Tomas Jakstas, Evaldas Padervinskis, Aurelija Vegiene & Virgilijus Uloza

  2. Oncology Research Laboratory, Oncology Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Agne Bartnykaite & Rasa Ugenskiene

  3. Oncology Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Elona Juozaityte

  4. Department of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Rasa Ugenskiene

Authors
  1. Tomas Jakstas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Agne Bartnykaite
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Evaldas Padervinskis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aurelija Vegiene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elona Juozaityte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Virgilijus Uloza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rasa Ugenskiene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by TJ, AV,EP and VU, genotyping and data analysis was performed by AB, TJ, RU and EJ. The first draft of the manuscript was written by TJ and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomas Jakstas.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Kaunas Regional Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (authorization protocols No. BE-2-37, No. BE-2-10 and No. P1-BE-2-10/2014). Informed consent was obtained from all the participants before inclusion in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jakstas, T., Bartnykaite, A., Padervinskis, E. et al. The association of E2F1 and E2F2 single nucleotide polymorphisms with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma pathomorphological features. BMC Cancer 24, 214 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-11953-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-11953-z

Keywords

BMC Cancer

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us