Skip Navigation


Mutagenesis Advance Access originally published online on August 22, 2006
Mutagenesis 2006 21(5):313-320; doi:10.1093/mutage/gel035
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/5/313    most recent
gel035v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Varga, D.
Right arrow Articles by Vogel, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Varga, D.
Right arrow Articles by Vogel, W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

On the difference of micronucleus frequencies in peripheral blood lymphocytes between breast cancer patients and controls

Dominic Varga1,2, Josef Hoegel1, Christiane Maier1, Silke Jainta1, Maren Hoehne1, Brenda Patino-Garcia1, Isabell Michel1, Ulrike Schwarz-Boeger3, Marion Kiechle3, Rolf Kreienberg2 and Walther Vogel1,*

1 Department of Human Genetics, University of Ulm Germany 2 Department of Gynecology, University of Ulm Germany 3 Department of Gynecology, Technische Universitaet Muenchen Germany

Sporadic breast cancer patients as well as mutation carriers of the BRCA genes have a reduced DNA repair capacity compared to controls when assessed by the G0 micronucleus test (G0MNT) or by induced chromosomal aberrations. Since the individual MN frequencies vary widely and overlap between cases and controls it remained unclear which percentage of the cases should be considered to exhibit an increased radiosensitivity. We performed a similar case–control study and found a highly significant difference (P < 0.0001) between all breast cancer cases (N = 91) and female controls (N = 96) using descriptive statistics and ANOVA with adjustment for age. This difference also holds for baseline MN frequencies (P = 0.0006) and for subgroups of the patients similar to those without treatment (P < 0.0001). These results were confirmed in a second sample acquired at a different hospital. Since we are dealing in this analysis with two predefined groups (patients and controls), we calculated odds ratios (ORs) in order to assess the discriminative power of the G0MNT. These amounted to OR = 4.9 (P < 0.0001) for MN frequencies obtained by visual counting and ranged from OR = 11 (P < 0.0011) to OR = 22 (P < 0.0001) using automated counting. In order to overcome the problem of choosing a cut-off point inherent in ORs, receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated, which visualize specificity and sensitivity over the entire range of values and which characterize the discriminative power of a test by the area under the curve (AUC) (visual counting, baseline: AUC = 0.67; induced AUC = 0.75; automated counting: AUC > 0.88; evaluation sample: AUC > 0.73). We conclude that the G0MNT may be a useful tool to substitute the phenotype breast cancer in association and linkage studies and that it may be possible to develop a test useful in the diagnosis or risk assessment for breast cancer.

*To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Human Genetics, University of Ulm, 89069 Ulm, Germany. Tel: +49 731 50023430; Fax: +49 731 50023438; Email: walther.vogel{at}uni-ulm.de


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.