Research Article Open Access
Investigation Of Nitric Oxide Synthase 3 (Nos3) Glu298asp Gene Variation In Breast Cancer Patients
Canan Cacina1,2,6, Cem Horozoglu1,2,6, Oncu Koc Erbasoglu1, Bahar Toptas1, Yemliha Yildiz1, Soykan Arıkan3, Seden Kucucuk4, İlhan Yaylım1 and Turgay İsbir5
1Department of Molecular Medicine, Aziz Sancar Institute of Experimental Medicine, Istanbul University, İstanbul-Turkey
2Department of Medical Services and Techniques, Istanbul Gelisim University, Istanbul-Turkey
3Clinic of Surgery, Istanbul Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul-Turkey
4Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, Istanbul University, İstanbul-Turkey
5Department of Medical Biology, Faculity of Medicine, Yeditepe University, İstanbul
6Both authors contributed equally to this work.
*Corresponding author: İlhan Yaylim, Istanbul University, Aziz Sancar Institute for Experimental Medicine, Department of Molecular Medicine, Vakif Gureba Cad. Capa 34390 Istanbul Turkey, Tel: +90 0212 6351959, Fax: +90 0212 6351959, e-mail address: ilhanyaylim@gmail.com
Received: March 28, 2018; Accepted: September 11, 2018; Published: September 20, 2018
Citation: Yaylım I, Cacina C, Horozoglu C, Erbasoglu OK, et al. (2018) Investigation Of Nitric Oxide Synthase 3 (Nos3) Glu298asp Gene Variation In Breast Cancer Patients. Int J Gen Sci 5(2): 1-5. DOI: 10.15226/2377-4274/5/2/00125
Abstract
The role of Nitric Oxide (NO) in tumor biology is not well understood. However, it has been proposed that NO is a highly reactive free radical and plays important roles in growth, progression or metastasis of tumour. Nitric oxide syntheses (NOSs) are a family of enzymes that catalyzing the production of NO by converting L-arginine to L-citrulline. The aim of present study was to examine Nitric Oxide Synthase 3 (NOS3) Glu298Asp polymorphism in patients with breast cancer. For this purpose, 49 patients with breast cancer and 89 healthy controls were included in the study. The NOS3 Glu298Asp polymorphism was genotyped by PCR-RFLP using peripheral blood samples in our study groups. NOS3 Glu298Asp genotype distribution in the breast cancer patients was statistically different from the healthy control group NOS3 Glu298Asp gene variation T allele frequency was significantly higher in breast cancer patients that of controls. Our finding suggests that NOS3 Glu298Asp might be associated with breast cancer risk.

Key words : Oxidative stress; NOS3; breast cancer.
Introduction
Breast cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the world and is ranked first among the most commonly diagnosed cancers in women and second among the most commonly cause of death in cancer [1]. Known risk factors for breast cancer include family history, age, first gestational age, alcohol consumption, postmenopausal obesity, and ionizing radiation. However, all these factors are insufficient to understand the etiology of breast cancer and its geographical variation [2]. The heterogeneity of genes involved in oxidative stress and metabolism of carcinogens can also affect the susceptibility to breast cancer [3].

Free radical nitric oxide (NO) is an important biological mediator that plays a role in various cytostatic and cytotoxic functions and is associated with apoptosis, metastasis and angiogenesis [4]. Reactive nitrogen species, derived from NO and NO, by leading to oxidative and nitrosative stress,cause DNA damage and DNA repair enzymes to be inhibited by direct or indirect mechanisms [5]. Nitric oxide (NO) is synthesized by Nitric Oxide Synthase (NOS) is forms during L-sitrulinin, L-arginine conversion [6, 7]. NO has tumor growth and tumor angiogenesis stimulation and metastasis-activating effects at low concentrations, whereas at higher concentrations, tumor cells play a role in apoptosis processing and tumor growth arrest [8]. Changes in the balance between cell proliferation and apoptosis contribute to the pathogenesis of many diseases. NO can change this balance because it is toxic or protective depending on the concentration, cell type and environmental conditions, it can cause or inhibit apoptosis [9]. In endothelial cells, there are two forms of Nitric Oxide Sentetase (NOS), the inducible NOS encoded by the NOS2 gene and the endothelial NOS encoded by the NOS3 gene [10]. NOS3 is encoded by a 26 exon gene on chromosome 7 [11]. The Glu298Asp variant of NOS3is one of the common polymorphisms seen in this gene and is characterized by glutamate-aspartate exchange (G-T) for codon 298 at nucleotide 894. In some studies it has been concluded that NOS3 Glu298Asp (894G> T) mutant TT variant may be associated with breast cancer [12].

In our study, it was aimed to determine genotype and allele frequencies in patient and control subjects in order to investigate the importance of NOS3 gene Glu298Asp polymorphism in breast cancer susceptibility. At the same time, the relationship between the clinical and prognostic parameters of the disease and NOS3 polymorphism was examined in patients with breast cancer.
Materials And Methods
In our study, 49 breast cancer patients were included in the patient group and 89 healthy individuals were included in the control group. Patients with breast cancer were followed by Istanbul University Oncology Institute Radiation Oncology and Istanbul Training and Research Hospital Surgical Clinic. Pathologically diagnosed and clinical evaluations and sampling of patients with breast cancer who were included in the project were performed by the relevant clinics.

Medical Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medical Faculty approval was obtained for the study. The protocol followed was consistent with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human subjects). Our work has been supported by the Istanbul University Scientific Research Projects Unit with project number 44022.
Genotyping
DNA isolation was performed by salting out peripheral blood samples from breast cancer patients and healthy subjects [13]. 5’- AAG GCA GGA GAC AGT GGA TGGA -3 ‘and 5’- CCC AGT CAA TCC CTT TGG TGC TCA -3’ specific primer sequences were used for the amplification of the gene region of NOS3 Glu298Asp gene polymorphism. The PCR reaction mixture contained 50-100 ng of genomic DNA, 1x PCR buffer, 0.2 mM dNTP, 3mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM primer and 0.5 U Taq polymerase (MBI Fermentas, Lithuania). The PCR conditions were determined as first denaturation at 95 °C for 5 minutes, 35 cycles at 94°C for 1minute, 58°C for 1minute, 72°C for 1minute, and a final extension at 72°C for 5 minutes. Amplification products after PCR were cut with Ban II enzyme. Products obtained after restriction were run on 3% agarose gel electrophoresis and genotyped after UV imaging. After the enzymatic restriction, one fragment having 248 bp was as homozygous (TT), two fragments having 163 and 85 bp was as homozygotes (GG) andthree fragment having 248, 163 and 85 bp was as heterozygous (GT) were evaluated [14].
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyzes of this study were performed using the SPSS 11 package program. The statistical significance limit was taken as p < 0.05. Chi square (χ2) was used in evaluating the frequency of alleles with NOS3 Glu298Asp genotype and the differences between groups. Student-t test was used for numerical data analysis.
Results
The information about the healthy controls and the patients with breast cancer used in our study are shown in Table 1. There was no statistical significance between the patients with breast cancer and the control group in terms of family history, sex, smoking and other parameters. There was no significant difference in age between the patients and control groups (p> 0.05).

80% of the patients with breast cancer who participated in our study were invasive ductal, 8.9% were invasive lobules and 11.1% were combined type. 29% of the patients were premenopausal, and 71% were postmenopausal women. It was detected ER(-) in 15.8% of patients and PR(-) in 13.9% of patients. It was determined vascular invasion in 44.2%, perinodal invasion in 46.3% and capsule invasion in 50% of patients with breast cancer.
Table 1: Information about working group

 

Control n=89

Breast Cancer Patients n=49

Sample Number s(Female/Male)

64/25

49/49

Age Averages (Year)

51.14 ± 16.32

54.02 ± 11.04

The values in the table are given as x + SD. Groups were examined with the significance level student t test.
Considering the results of NOS3 Glu298Asp gene polymorphism, when we examined our study group in terms of genotype distribution, NOS3 Glu298Aspgenotype distribution in patients with breast cancer and control group is seen in Table 2. In our study, the T allele frequency of the NOS3 Glu298Asp variant was higher in the breast cancer patient group than in the control group and the difference was statistically significant (χ2 = 7.229, p = 0.007, OR: 1.228, 95% CI: 1.065-1.415).
Table 2: Genotype frequencies of study groups

 

Control N(%) n=89

Breast Cancer Patients N(%) n=49

p value

NOS3 Glu298Asp

 

 

 

GG

25(28.1)

2(4.1)

0.024

GT

34 (38.2)

22 (44.9)

 

TT

30(33.7)

25(51.0)

 

ALLELE

 

 

 

G

84(47.2)

26(26.5)

 

T

94(52.8)

72(73.5)

0.007

The values in the table are given as sample number and percentage. The differences between the groups are shown by the Kikare test.
No statistically significant difference was found between the genotype distribution of NOS3 Glu298Asp variation and parameters such as age, sex, family history, smoking status of the patients. Given the demographic data of patients with breast cancer, the percentages of detected genotype distributions are shown in Table 3.

An interesting finding was that all of the patients with estrogen receptor ER(-) had T allele of theGlu298Asp variant (χ2 =: 0.439; p = 0.980; OR: 1.074; 95% CI: 0.973-1.186). In our study, all patients with progesterone receptor PR(-) from patients with breast cancer were carrying the TT genotype.

In patients with lymph node involvement positive (N) positive examined in the study, the possibility of carrying the NOS3 Glu298Asp TT genotype was increased but there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.697). At the same time,
Table 3: NOS3 Glu298Asp genotype distribution according to the characteristics of patients with breast cancer

NOS3 Glu298Asp (%)

GG

GT

TT

p değeri

Age

45<

3.1

42.4

54.5

p>0.05

45≥

9.1

45.5

45.5

Family cancer story

Present

8.3

50

41.7

p>0.05

Absent

3.8

42.3

53.8

Smoking

Yes

12.5

50

37.5

p>0.05

No

3

44.1

52.9

The values in the table are given as sample number and percentage. The differences between the groups are shown by the Kikare test.
Table 4: Analysis of NOS3 Glu298Asp gene polymorphism according to pathologic data of patients with breast cancer

Pathological data

NOS3 Glu298Asp (%)

 

GG

GT

TT

Tumor size

 

 

 

T1

0

44.4

55.6

T2

0

52.9

47.1

T3

0

33.3

66.7

T4

50

50

0

N stage

 

 

 

N0

11.1

55.6

33.3

N1

0

50

50

N2

9.1

36.4

54.5

N3

0

0

100

Distant metastasis

 

 

 

Present

0

33.3

66.7

Absent

5.6

47.2

47.2

ER

 

 

 

Positive

6.9

51.7

41.4

Negative

0

33.3

66.7

PR

 

 

 

Positive

7.1

60.7

32.1

Negative

0

0

100

Perinodal invasion

 

 

 

Present

5.9

41.2

52.9

Absent

0

52.6

47.4

Vascular invasion

 

 

 

Present

8.7

43.5

47.8

Absent

0

50

50

ER: Estrogen receptor, PR: Progesterone receptor
had T allele of theGlu298Asp variant was observed in these patients at a higher rate and no statistically significant data was obtained (χ2 = 1.064, p = 0.381). Table 4

In our patient group,T allele frequency of the Glu298Asp variant decreased in T3+T4tumor stage patients, but statistical significance was not found. In our study, patients with T3+T4 breast cancer increased in G allele frequency, this data in patients with breast cancer did not reach statistical significance (χ2=:0.023;p=0.880). According to the distant metastasis presence in the patient group, when the NOS3 Glu298Asp gene variation was examined, the Gallele was found in patients without distant metastasis at a higher rate than those with distant metastasis, the difference was not statistically significant. In addition, vascular invasion was observed more frequently in patients with breast carcinoma carrying the GG genotype, but a statistically significant data could not be achieved. However, no significant correlation was found between clinical and prognostic parameters and genotype and allele distribution of NOS3 Glu298Asp polymorphism in our patient group (p> 0.05).
Discussion
Although the role of nitric oxide in tumor biology has not been fully elucidated, it has been suggested to play a role in many physiological and pathophysiological processes involving vasodilatation, neurotransmission, the immune system and cancer [12, 15]. Endothelial nitric oxide synthase (NOS3) and neuronal nitric oxide synthase (NOS1) are calcium-dependent enzymes that maintain low levels of basal NO production. In contrast, inducible nitric oxide synthase (NOS2) produces high levels of NO in the presence of appropriate physiological stimulus [16, 17]. All three is forms are present in the heart, and NOS1 is present in sympathetic nerve endings, NOS3 in vascular endothelial cells, and NOS2 in active macrophages and myocytes [17]. It has been suggested in various studies that NO regulates different cancer events such as angiogenesis, apoptosis, cell cycle, invasion and metastasis. On the other hand, NO also emerges as a potential anti-oncogenic agent [18]. Nitric oxide is thought to induce apoptosis at high concentrations, while it is known to exhibit anti-apoptotic effects at low concentrations [19].

Studies have reported NOS gene expression in breast cancer tissues and breast carcinoma cell lines. There was NO increase in blood of breast cancer patients and higher NOS activity in invasive breast tumors compared to benign or normal breast tissue. Furthermore, NOS activity was found to be higher in advanced stage breast carcinomas [18]. Mortensen et al. have shown that NOS3 is present in both breast cancer cells and endothelial cells, and that the high density of NOS3 in normal tissue around breast cancer is associated with statistically significantly longer survival [19]. Martin et al. have shown that NOS3 is expressed in breast cancer tumors and is negatively associated with histologic grade and lymph node status [20].

In our study, there was a statistically significant difference in the distribution of NOS3 Glu298Asp gene polymorphism between patients with breast cancer and the control group (p = 0.024). However, the frequency of T allele carriers of Glu298Asp variant was found to be statistically significantly higher in the breast cancer group than in the control group (p = 0.007).When the age factor is considered, it is determined that the GG genotype of NOS3 Glu298Asp variant is higher than the other genotypesin the patients with breast cancer, especially 45 years and younger. Although our study did not reach statistical significance, lymph node metastasis was found to be more positive in patients with breast cancer carrying TT genotypes of Glu298Asp variant. Another interesting finding is the TT genotype of all breast cancer patients with estrogen or progesterone receptor negative. Studies conducted between NOS3 Glu298Asp polymorphism and cancer risk are available in the literature, but the results are debatable [10, 21– 30].

In a study involving 502 breast cancer patients and 505 healthy individuals, Yang et al. did not find a significant association between Glu298Asp polymorphism and breast cancer [21]. For breast cancer, Ghilardi et al. reported that there was no association between NOS3 gene polymorphism and breast cancer risk in studies involving 71 patients and 91 controls in Italy [10]. Similarly, Royo et al. [22] and Lu et al. [23] did not find any association between NOS3 gene polymorphism and breast cancer in their studies. In a study involving 269 patients with breast cancer and 244 control groups in Austria, Hefler et al. reported that NOS3 Glu298Asp polymorphism was associated with a 2fold increased risk [24]. The findings of our study are also consistent with the studies results of Hefler et al.

In a study involving 360 colorectal cancer patients and 550 healthy individuals in Spain, no significant difference in Glu298Asp genotype distribution and allele frequency between patient and control group was reported [25]. In a study conducted by Medeiros et al. in a Portuguese population, no association was found between prostate cancer risk and Glu298Asp gene polymorphism [26]. In another study, Cheon et al. reported that NOS3 gene locus in lung cancer may affect plasma NO levels, and there may be a relationship between NOS3 polymorphism and lung cancer development [27], but there are studies reporting that this is the opposite correlation [10].

As a result of our study, we concluded that NOS3 Glu298Asp polymorphism may be associated with breast cancer risk. Our study is the first study to examine the NOS3 gene variant carrier in Turkish breast cancer cases and it is unique in terms of reveal the allele frequency of the related variant in the Turkish population. Despite the data obtained, the limitation of our work is the small sample size. Extensive studies in larger sample groups are needed to elucidate the molecular mechanisms related to oxidative stress and to confirm the findings. However, in addition to examining other SNPs belonging to the NOS3 gene in the future, it is aimed to reveal its effects by examining the levels of NOS3 gene expression.
Acknowledgements
Our work has been supported by the Istanbul University Scientific Research Projects Unit with project number 44022.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in the preparation and publication of this article.
Ethical Approval
Medical Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medical Faculty approval was obtained for the study. The protocol followed was consistent with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human subjects).
References
  1. GhonchehM, PournamdarZ, SalehiniyaH. Incidence and Mortality and Epidemiology of Breast Cancerin the World. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016;17(S3):43-46.
  2. MacMahonB. Epidemiology and the causes ofbreast cancer. Int. J. Cancer2006;118(10):2373–2378.
  3. Rodrigues P, de Marco G, Furriol J, Mansego ML, Pineda-Alonso M,Gonzalez-Neira A et al.Oxidative stress in susceptibility to breast cancer: study in Spanish population. BMC Cancer 2014;14:861-875.
  4. Mandal P.Molecular signature of nitric oxide on major cancer hallmarks of colorectal carcinoma. Inflammopharmacology 2017; 26(2):331-336.
  5. Fukumura D, Kashiwagi S, Jain RK. The role of nitric oxide in tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 Jul;6(7):521-534.
  6. Yarlagadda K, Hassani J, Foote PI, Markowitz J. The role of nitric oxide in melanoma. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2017;1868(2):500–509
  7. Thwe PM, Amiel E. The role of nitric oxide in metabolic regulation of Dendritic cell immune function. Cancer Lett. 2018 Jan 1;412:236-242.
  8. Cheng H, Wang L, Mollica M, Re AT, Wu S, Zuo L. Nitric oxide in cancer metastasis. Cancer Lett. 2014 October 10;353(1):1–7.
  9. Choi BM, Pae HO, Jang SI. Kim YM, Chung HT.Nitric oxide asa pro-apoptotic as well as anti-apoptotic modülatör. J Biochem Mol Biol. 2002;35(1):116-126.
  10. Ghilardi G, Biondi ML, Cecchini F. DeMonti M, Guagnellini E, Scorza R. Vascular invasion in human breast cancer is correlated to T786C polymorphism of NOS3 gene. Nitric Oxide 2003;9(2):118–122.
  11. Dellamea BS, Pinto LC, Leitão CB, Santos KG, Canani LH.Endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene polymorphisms and risk of diabetic nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Med Genet. 2014 Jan 16;15:9.
  12. Hao Y, Montiel R, Huang Y. Endothelialnitric oxide synthase (eNOS) 894 G>T polymorphism is associated with breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010Dec;124(3):809-8 13.
  13. Miller SA, Dykes DD, Polesky HF. A simplesalting out procedure for extracting DNA from human nucleated cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 1988;16(3):1215
  14. McNamara DM, Holubkov R, Postava L, Ramani R, Janosko K, Mathier M  et al. Effect of the Asp298 Variant of Endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase on Survival for Patients With Congestive Heart Failure, Circulation, 2003;107:1598-1602.
  15. Xu W, Liu LZ, Loizidou M, Ahmed M, Charles IG.The role of nitric oxide in cancer.Cell Res. 2002 Dec;12(5-6):311-3           20.
  16. Lowry JL1, Brovkovych V, Zhang Y, Skidgel RA.Endothelial nitric-oxide synthase activation generates an inducible nitric-oxide synthase-like output of nitric oxide in inflamed endothelium.J Biol Chem. 2013 Feb 8;288(6):4174-4193.
  17. Förstermann U, Sessa WC.Nitric oxide synthases: regulation and function.Eur Heart J. 2012 Apr;33(7):829-837.
  18. Choudhari SK, Chaudhary M, Bagde S, Gadbail AR, Joshi V.Nitric oxide and cancer: a review.World J Surg Oncol. 2013 May 30;11:118.
  19. MortensenK,Holck S,Christensen IJ, Skouv J, Hougaard DM, Blom Jet al. Endothelial cell nitric oxide synthase in peritumoral microvessels is a favorable prognostic indicator in premenopausal breast cancer patients. Clin. Cancer Res. 1999;5(5):1093–1097.
  20. Martin JH, Begum S, Alalami O, Harrison A, Scott KW.Endothelial nitric oxide synthase: correlation with histologic grade, lymph node status and estrogen receptor expression in human breast cancer. Tumour Biol. 2000;21:90–97.
  21. Yang J, Ambrosone CB, Hong CC, Ahn J, Rodriguez C, Thun MJ et al. Relationships between polymorphisms in NOS3 and MPO genes, cigarette smoking and risk of post-menopausal breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2007 Jun;28(6):1247-1253.
  22. Royo JL, Moreno-Nogueira JA, Galán JJ, González-Martín A, Ruiz A, González-Mancha R et al. Lack of association between NOS3 Glu298Asp and breast cancer risk: a case-control study. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;100(3):331-3.
  23. Lu J, Wei Q, Bondy ML, Yu TK, Li D, Brewster A et al. Promoterpolymorphism (-786t.C) in the endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene is associated with risk of sporadic breast cancer in non-Hispanic white women age younger than 55 years. Cancer2006;107(9):2245–2253.
  24. Hefler LA, Grimm C, Lantzsch T, Lampe D, Koelbl H, Lebrecht Aet al. Polymorphisms of the endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat.2006;98(2):151–155.
  25. Conde MC, Ramirez-Lorca R, Lopez-Jamar JM, Molero E, Ramírez-Armengol JA, Moreno Nogueira JAetal. Genetic analysis of caveolin-1 and eNOS genes in colorectal cancer. Oncol. Rep2006;16(2):353–359.
  26. Medeiros RM, Morais A, Vasconcelos A, Costa S, Pinto D, Oliveira Jet al. Outcome in prostate cancer: association with endothelial nitric oxide synthase Glu-Asp298 polymorphism at exon 7. Clin. Cancer Res.2002;8(11): 3433–3437.
  27. Cheon KT, Choi KH, Lee HB, Park SK, Rhee YK, Lee YC.Genepolymorphisms of endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase and angiotensin-converting enzyme in patients with lung cancer. Lung 2000;178(6):351–360.
  28. Medeiros R, Morais A, Vasconcelos A, Costa S, Pinto D, Oliveira Jet al. Endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene polymorphisms and genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer. Eur. J. Cancer Prev.2002;11(4):343–350.
  29. Riener EK, Hefler LA, Grimm C, Galid A, Zeillinger R, Tong-Cacsire Det al. Polymorphisms of the endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene in women with vulvar cancer. Gynecol. Oncol.2004;93(3):686–690.
  30. Choi JY, Lee KM, Noh DY, Ahn SH, Lee JE, Han Wet al. Geneticpolymorphisms of eNOS, hormone receptor status, and survival of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat.2006; 100(2): 213–218.
 
Listing : ICMJE   

Creative Commons License Open Access by Symbiosis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License