Clinical Cancer Research Meeting Calendar Advances in Breast Cancer
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Röcken, C.
Right arrow Articles by Ebert, M. P.A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Röcken, C.
Right arrow Articles by Ebert, M. P.A.
Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 11, 2526-2530, April 2005
© 2005 American Association for Cancer Research

Imaging, Diagnosis, Prognosis

The Number of Lymph Node Metastases in Gastric Cancer Correlates with the Angiotensin I–Converting Enzyme Gene Insertion/Deletion Polymorphism

Christoph Röcken1, Uwe Lendeckel3, Jutta Dierkes4, Sabine Westphal4, Stacy Carl-McGrath1, Brigitte Peters5, Sabine Krüger1, Peter Malfertheiner2, Albert Roessner1 and Matthias P.A. Ebert2

Authors' Affiliations: Departments of 1 Pathology, and 2 Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, Institutes of 3 Experimental Internal Medicine, 4 Clinical Chemistry, and 5 Biometrics, Otto-von-Guericke-University, Magdeburg, Germany

Requests for reprints: Christoph Röcken, Department of Pathology, Otto-von-Guericke-University, Leipziger Straße 44, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany. Phone: 49(0)391-6713179; Fax: 49(0)391-67190188; E-mail: christoph.roecken{at}medizin.unimagdeburg.de.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Purpose: In the present study, we aimed to substantiate the putative significance of angiotensin I–converting enzyme (ACE) on gastric cancer biology by investigating the influence of its gene polymorphism on gastric cancer progression.

Experimental Design: Genomic DNA was purified from peripheral blood mononuclear cells or tissue specimens. Amplified ACE gene fragments were separated on agarose gels. D or I alleles were identified by the presence of 190- or 490-bp fragments, respectively. Local expression of ACE was investigated by immunohistochemistry.

Results: Twenty-four of 113 (21%) gastric cancer patients had the II, 57 (51%) the ID, and 32 (28%) the DD genotype. The distribution of the ACE genotypes did not differ significantly from the control group of 189 patients without gastric cancer. However, the ACE genotypes correlated with the number of lymph node metastases and the Unio Internationale Contra Cancrum (UICC) tumor stage. Patients with the II genotype had a highly significantly smaller number of lymph node metastases (P < 0.001) and a significantly lower UICC tumor stage (P = 0.01) than patients with the DD genotype. No correlation was found between tumor type, tumor location, local tumor growth, distant metastases, and the ACE genotype. The expression of ACE in gastric cancer was investigated by immunohistochemistry in 100 of 113 patients. ACE was expressed by endothelial cells in all (100%) specimens and by tumor cells in 56 (56%) specimens.

Conclusions: Our study shows that ACE is expressed locally in gastric cancer and that the gene polymorphism influences metastatic behavior.

Key Words: Gastric cancer • Angiotensin I-Converting Enzyme • Gastrointestinal cancers: other • Risk assessment

Angiotensin I–converting enzyme (ACE, CD143) is a type I cell surface zinc metallopeptidase, expressed by many cell types of various organs and tissue types, including vascular endothelial cells, epithelial cells of the small intestine, kidney tubular cells, mononuclear cells, and fibroblasts (1). ACE cleaves C-terminal dipeptides from oligopeptide substrates with an unhindered C terminus. It generates angiotensin II, the major effector of the renin-angiotensin system. Angiotensin II is a potent vasoconstrictor and activator of aldosterone and induces reabsorption of sodium and raises the blood pressure. ACE inhibitors are used in the treatment of heart failure, hypertension, and coronary heart disease.

There is mounting evidence that ACE also participates locally in the pathology of carcinomas (1, 2). ACE is differentially expressed in several malignancies (1) and influences tumor cell proliferation, tumor cell migration, angiogenesis, and metastatic behavior (2–4). Inhibition of ACE activity suppresses tumor growth and angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo in animal models (5–9), and epidemiologic studies have provided evidence that ACE inhibitors may decrease the risk and mortality rate of cancer (10, 11). ACE inhibitors are currently under consideration as "novel" antineoplastic treatment and cancer prevention strategies (2, 11). A polymorphism in the ACE gene, consisting of the insertion (I) or deletion (D) of a 287-bp DNA fragment in intron 16, accounts for 20% to 50% of the variance in ACE expression or activity in blood and tissues among individuals (12–14). Medeiros et al. (15) showed that this ACE gene polymorphism is significantly associated with advanced disease in prostate cancer, and we recently found a significant up-regulation of ACE mRNA and protein levels in gastric cancer (16). Intrigued by these observations, we aimed to elucidate the putative significance of ACE on gastric cancer biology by investigating the influence of the gene polymorphism on gastric cancer progression.


   Materials and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Patient populations and samples. Samples from 113 gastric cancer patients operated on between 1995 and 2002 were retrieved from the archive of the Department of Pathology (Table 1). Sera or tissue samples used in the present study were obtained from patients who had undergone either complete (85 of 113 cases) or partial (28 of 113 cases) gastrectomies as well as from 189 control patients without gastric cancer (Table 1). Criteria of exclusion were the confirmation of gastric cancer only by biopsy and the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma arising from Barrett's esophagus. This study was carried out in accordance with the guidelines of the Ethics Committee of the University of Magdeburg. Data were encoded to ensure patient protection.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Patient characteristics

 
Determination of the ACE genotype. Genomic DNA was purified from peripheral blood mononuclear cells or tissue specimens by using the QIAamp DNA blood kit (Qiagen) or the E.Z.N.A. Tissue DNA Mini Kit (PEQLAB Biotechnologie GmbH, Elangen, Germany). DNA was dissolved at 100 ng/µL in 10 mmol/L Tris-HCl, 1 mmol/L EDTA, pH 8.0. The ACE genotype of patients and healthy controls was determined by PCR according to Yoshida et al. (17). A typical 50-µL reaction mixture consisted of 25 µL of HotStarTaq Master Mix (Qiagen), 100 ng of genomic DNA, 250 pmol of each primer (ACE-US: 5'-CTggAgACCACTCCCATCCTTTCT; ACE-DS: 5'-gATgTggCCATCACATTCgTCAgAT), and 5% (v/v) DMSO. An initial 15-minute denaturation at 95°C was followed by 40 cycles for 1 minute at 64°C, 1 minute at 72°C, and 0.6 minute at 94°C. Amplified ACE gene fragments were separated on 1.6 % agarose gels and visualized by ethidium bromide staining. D or I alleles were identified by the presence of 190- or 490-bp fragments, respectively (Fig. 1). An independent PCR analysis was carried out for each sample.



View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 1 Determination of ACE genotypes by PCR amplification. Amplified ACE gene fragments were separated on 1.6 % agarose gels and visualized by ethidium bromide staining. D or I alleles were identified by the presence of 190- or 490-bp fragments, respectively. M, molecular weight markers; N1-N5, control group; T1-T5, patients diagnosed with gastric cancer.

 
Histology and immunohistochemistry. For histology, tissue samples were fixed in 10% neutralized formalin and embedded in paraffin. Deparaffinized sections were stained using H&E. Gastric cancer was classified according to Laurén (18) into diffuse, intestinal, and mixed type (Table 1). The tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage was determined according to the Unio Internationale Contra Cancrum (UICC) guidelines (19) and was based on histologic confirmation. Immunostaining was done as described elsewhere (16). Omission of primary antibodies served as negative controls.

Statistical analysis. Differences between populations were evaluated using a {chi}2 test or one-way ANOVA for comparison of group means. Continuous variables were compared by means of the unpaired Student's t test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered to be "significant". However, for the comparison of subgroups, an {alpha} correction of the P value was carried out and a value of 0.016 was then considered to be significant.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
ACE gene polymorphism. Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics of the patients. The mean age of the gastric cancer patients was 63.8 ± 12.6 years, including 82 men and 31 women, and the mean age of the control patients was 67.7 ± 6.1 years, including 75 men and 114 women. Although the control group included significantly more women than the gastric cancer group, the gene polymorphism was not associated with patient gender. Twenty-four of 113 (21%) patients with gastric cancer had the II, 57 (50%) the ID, and 32 (28%) the DD genotype. The distribution of the ACE genotypes did not differ significantly from the control group or from the distribution predicted by the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (Table 1).

Univariate analyses showed that the ACE genotype correlated highly significantly with the number of lymph node metastases (P < 0.002) and nodal involvement in terms of N category (P = 0.004), and significantly with the UICC tumor stage (Table 1; P = 0.02). Comparing the group of tumors comprised of UICC stages IA, IB, and II with those of stages IIIA, IIIB, and IV results in a significant correlation between the ACE genotype and the UICC tumor stages (P = 0.006). Note that the UICC tumor stage is also dependent on the N category. On average, 26.5 ± 12.5 lymph nodes were studied per patient with no significant differences in the number of lymph nodes investigated in each ACE genotype group (i.e., II versus ID versus DD; Table 1). Thus, the total number of lymph nodes investigated did not influence the number of lymph node metastases observed (Table 1).

We then compared gastric cancer patients with the II and the DD genotype. In these two subgroups, 21 (88%) patients with the II genotype were found to have either no (n = 0) or less than six (n = 1) lymph node metastases, whereas 17 (53%) patients with the DD genotype were found to have more than six (n = 2 or 3) lymph node metastases (P < 0.001; odds ratio, 7.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.97-32.01). Similarly, 14 (58%) patients with the II genotype were found to be in stage I or II gastric cancer, whereas 25 (78%) patients with the DD genotype were found to be in stage III to IV gastric cancer (P = 0.01; odds ratio, 5.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-16.06). Tumor type (classification according to Laurén), tumor location (gastroesophageal junction, corpus/fundus, and antrum/pylorus), or local tumor growth (T category) was not associated with the ACE genotype.

A drug history was available from 46 gastric cancer patients. Only eight patients had received ACE inhibitors for reasons unrelated to gastric cancer, resulting in a sample size too small to study any correlations between the administration of ACE inhibitors and the TNM categories or the UICC tumor stage.

Immunohistochemistry. Immunohistochemistry was done on paraffin-embedded tissue sections from 100 of 113 patients with gastric cancer. We examined the expression of ACE in the nontumorous foveolar and surface epithelium, any occurrences of intestinal metaplasia, endothelial cells, and the carcinomas. ACE was expressed in tumor epithelial cells of 56 (56%) and in endothelial cells of all (100%) patients (Fig. 2). Intestinal metaplasia was found in 29 patients and showed immunoreactivity at the brush border in 28 (97%) cases. ACE was not expressed by nonneoplastic and nonmetaplastic gastric foveolar and surface epithelium. The expression of ACE in gastric cancer cells did not correlate with the genotype (Table 1), the TNM categories, or the UICC tumor stage.



View larger version (118K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 2. Expression of ACE in gastric cancer. The distribution and expression pattern of ACE in gastric carcinomas was investigated by immunohistochemistry. ACE was found in endothelial cells (A) and tumor epithelial cells (B). Monoclonal anti-ACE antibody; hematoxylin counterstain; original magnification, x400.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
Epidemiologic studies have investigated the association between the administration of ACE inhibitors and cancer risk, with no two studies reporting significant reductions in risk for the same type of cancer among patients taking ACE inhibitors (10, 11, 20–26). In contrast, experimental studies, investigating the influence of the renin-angiotensin system and ACE inhibitors on tumor growth, neoangiogenesis, and metastatic behavior, provide mounting evidence for the involvement of the renin-angiotensin system and ACE in tumor biology (5, 7–9). Despite the up-regulation of ACE observed in different solid human tumors (1), which underlines its potential significance for tumor biology, the discrepancy between the epidemiologic and the experimental studies has, until now, not been resolved.

The experimental studies have shown that the local renin-angiotensin system can influence tumor biology in different ways: (a) by promoting neoangiogenesis and by enhancing microvessel density in solid tumors, which is critical for tumor growth and is mediated in part by the vascular endothelial growth factors (3–5, 8, 9); (b) by promoting tumor cell proliferation (7, 28); and (c) by promoting the remodeling of the interstitial matrix (i.e., the mould in which tumor cells grow; ref. 29). Although these functions may be important for the biology of the tumor after induction, none of these putative pathophysiologic functions are initiating events in cancer development and biology, and there is no evidence to suggest that ACE functions either as a tumor suppressor gene or as an oncogene. The great majority of epidemiologic studies provide evidence that ACE inhibitors have no or only a minor effect on cancer risk (10, 20–26), and it is therefore probable that ACE activity affects tumor progression and disease outcome rather than incidence rate or tumor prevalence. The results of the epidemiologic study reported by Lever et al. (11) support this hypothesis, in that a significant inverse correlation was found between cancer mortality and the treatment with and the duration of administration of ACE inhibitors. Given the longer follow-up time period, a significant reduction in the risk of death from cancer in the patient group taking ACE inhibitors was able to be detected (11).

The serum and tissue expression, and hence the activity of ACE, is influenced by the insertion/deletion gene polymorphism, with an increased amount of ACE mRNA originating from the D allele (30). Recently, several studies have investigated the influence of this I/D gene polymorphism on cancer risk (15, 31–34), again with contradictory results. Cheon et al. (31) and Usmani et al. (34) did not find any correlation for renal and lung cancer patients. Haiman et al. (32) found a modest positive association between the II genotype and breast cancer risk. Koh et al. (33) found a significant link between the occurrence of the DD ACE gene polymorphism and the incidence of breast cancer. However, none of these studies considered tumor progression (i.e., tumor stage or mortality rates). Only two studies considered tumor stage or patient survival. Medeiros et al. (15) correlated the ACE gene polymorphism with the progression of prostate cancer and found a significant association between the DD genotype and the advancement of the disease. In a pilot study, Hajek et al. (35) correlated the ACE gene polymorphism with patient survival in leukemia and found that patients with the II genotype survived longer than those with the DD genotype.

In keeping with these observations, the distribution of different ACE gene alleles in our gastric cancer patients does not differ from the distribution in the general population, indicating that the risk to develop gastric cancer is not linked to a specific ACE genotype and hence enzyme expression or activity. Additionally, because patients with the DD genotype were significantly more commonly associated with a greater number of lymph node metastases and advanced UICC tumor stage, these findings support the hypothesis that ACE activity influences tumor progression, as opposed to tumor development. However, the pathophysiologic mechanism of ACE activity is not directly evident from our study.

Despite the local expression of the ACE protein observed in endothelial and tumor cells in the gastric cancer specimens, the ACE polymorphism was not linked to the T or M categories. It is therefore unlikely that ACE influences gastric cancer biology exclusively through variables that are known to have an effect on local tumor growth or distant metastases, such as tumor cell proliferation, neoangiogenesis of blood vessels, or tumor cell migration. Instead, the highly significant correlation between the ACE genotype and the number of lymph node metastases indicates that the D allele–related higher expression of ACE may promote the establishment of lymphatic metastases. However, the actual biological mechanism(s) need to be further investigated.

In summary, we provide strong evidence that ACE influences tumor progression and metastatic behavior but not the prevalence or incidence of gastric cancer. Recently, it was shown experimentally that a combination therapy including ACE inhibitors may prove useful in cancer treatment (7). A large number of ACE inhibitors are available, which are inexpensive, well tolerated, and seem to reduce the risk of side effects of other chemotherapeutics (32). The poor prognosis of gastric cancer is often related to the presentation in an advanced tumor stage and is most strongly influenced by lymph node involvement (odds ratio, 4.6; ref. 36). Thus, ACE inhibitors might prove useful for the treatment of gastric cancer, particularly by preventing or reducing nodal spread. The simple and rapid procedure of determining the ACE genotype could assist in tailoring the administration of ACE inhibitors by directing the treatment towards the higher risk patients (i.e., those with the DD or ID genotypes).


   Footnotes
 
Grant support: Heisenberg-Program of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, grant Eb 187/5-1 (M. Ebert).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Received 9/19/04; revised 11/29/04; accepted 1/11/05.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Bauvois B. Transmembrane proteases in cell growth and invasion: new contributors to angiogenesis? Oncogene 2004;23:317–29.[CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Abali H, Gullu IH, Engin H, Haznedaroglu IC, Erman M, Tekuzman G. Old antihypertensives as novel antineoplastics: angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists. Med Hypotheses 2002;59:344–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Fukui H. Perindopril: possible use in cancer therapy. Anticancer Drugs 2002;13:221–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Fukui H. Angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors may be an alternative anti-angiogenic strategy in the treatment of liver fibrosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Possible role of vascular endothelial growth factor. Tumour Biol 2002;23:348–56.[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Fujita M, Hayashi I, Yamashina S, Itoman M, Majima M. Blockade of angiotensin AT1a receptor signaling reduces tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2002;294:441–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Volpert OV, Ward WF, Lingen MW, et al. Captopril inhibits angiogenesis and slows the growth of experimental tumors in rats. J Clin Invest 1996;98:671–9.[Medline]
  7. Yasumaru M, Tsuji S, Tsujii M, et al. Inhibition of angiotensin II activity enhanced the antitumor effect of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors via insulin-like growth factor I receptor pathway. Cancer Res 2003;63:6726–34.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Kawata M, et al. The angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril suppresses tumor growth and angiogenesis: possible role of the vascular endothelial growth factor. Clin Cancer Res 2001;7:1073–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Yoshiji H, Yoshii J, Ikenaka Y, et al. Suppression of the renin-angiotensin system attenuates vascular endothelial growth factor–mediated tumor development and angiogenesis in murine hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Int J Oncol 2002;20:1227–31.[Medline]
  10. Jick H, Jick S, Derby LE, Vasilakis C, Myers MW, Meier CR. Calcium-channel blockers and risk of cancer. Lancet 1997;349:525–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
  11. Lever AF, Hole DJ, Gillis CR, et al. Do inhibitors of angiotensin-I-converting enzyme protect against risk of cancer? Lancet 1998;352:179–84.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Rigat B, Hubert C, Alhenc-Gelas F, Cambien F, Corvol P, Soubrier F. An insertion/deletion polymorphism in the angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene accounting for half the variance of serum enzyme levels. J Clin Invest 1990;86:1343–6.
  13. Tiret L, Rigat B, Visvikis S, et al. Evidence, from combined segregation and linkage analysis, that a variant of the angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) gene controls plasma ACE levels. Am J Hum Genet 1992;51:197–205.[Medline]
  14. Villard E, Tiret L, Visvikis S, Rakotovao R, Cambien F, Soubrier F. Identification of new polymorphisms of the angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) gene, and study of their relationship to plasma ACE levels by two-QTL segregation-linkage analysis. Am J Hum Genet 1996;58:1268–78.[Medline]
  15. Medeiros R, Vasconcelos A, Costa S, et al. Linkage of angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene insertion/deletion polymorphism to the progression of human prostate cancer. J Pathol 2004;202:330–5.[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Carl-McGrath S, Lendeckel U, Ebert M, et al. The ectopeptidases CD10, CD13, CD26, and CD143 are up-regulated in gastric cancer. Int J Oncol 2004;25:1223–32.[Medline]
  17. Yoshida H, Mitarai T, Kawamura T, et al. Role of the deletion of polymorphism of the angiotensin converting enzyme gene in the progression and therapeutic responsiveness of IgA nephropathy. J Clin Invest 1995;96:2162–9.
  18. Lauren T. The two histologic main types of gastric carcinoma: Diffuse and so-called intestinal-type carcinoma. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand 1965;64:31–49.[Medline]
  19. Wittekind Ch, Sobin LH. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 6th ed. Wiley-Liss, Inc.; 2002.
  20. Meier CR, Derby LE, Jick SS, Jick H. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and breast cancer. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:349–53.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Lindholm LH, Anderson H, Ekbom T, et al. Relation between drug treatment and cancer in hypertensives in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension 2: a 5-year, prospective, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet 2001;358:539–44.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Friis S, Sorensen HT, Mellemkjaer L, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and the risk of cancer: a population-based cohort study in Denmark. Cancer 2001;92:2462–70.[CrossRef][Medline]
  23. Grossman E, Messerli FH, Goldbourt U. Antihypertensive therapy and the risk of malignancies. Eur Heart J 2001;22:1343–52.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Ronquist G, Rodriguez LA, Ruigomez A, et al. Association between captopril, other antihypertensive drugs and risk of prostate cancer. Prostate 2004;58:50–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
  25. Li CI, Malone KE, Weiss NS, Boudreau DM, Cushing-Haugen KL, Daling JR. Relation between use of antihypertensive medications and risk of breast carcinoma among women ages 65-79 years. Cancer 2003;98:1504–13.[CrossRef][Medline]
  26. Stahl M, Bulpitt CJ, Palmer AJ, Beevers DG, Coles EC, Webster J. Calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and the risk of cancer in hypertensive patients: a report from the Department of Health Hypertension Care Computing Project (DHCCP). J Hum Hypertens 2000;14:299–304.[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Walther T, Menrad A, Orzechowski HD, Siemeister G, Paul M, Schirner M. Differential regulation of in vivo angiogenesis by angiotensin II receptors. FASEB J 2003;17:2061–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Reddy MK, Baskaran K, Molteni A. Inhibitors of angiotensin-converting enzyme modulate mitosis and gene expression in pancreatic cancer cells. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1995;210:221–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Suzuki Y, Ruiz-Ortega M, Lorenzo O, Ruperez M, Esteban V, Egido J. Inflammation and angiotensin II. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2003;35:881–900.[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Suehiro T, Morita T, Inoue M, Kumon Y, Ikeda Y, Hashimoto K. Increased amount of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) mRNA originating from the ACE allele with deletion. Hum Genet 2004;115:91–6.[Medline]
  31. Cheon KT, Choi KH, Lee HB, Park SK, Rhee YK, Lee YC. Gene polymorphisms of endothelial nitric oxide synthase and angiotensin-converting enzyme in patients with lung cancer. Lung 2000;178:351–60.[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Haiman CA, Henderson SO, Bretsky P, Kolonel LN, Henderson BE. Genetic variation in angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) and breast cancer risk: the multiethnic cohort. Cancer Res 2003;63:6984–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Koh WP, Yuan JM, Sun CL, et al. Angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) gene polymorphism and breast cancer risk among Chinese women in Singapore. Cancer Res 2003;63:573–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Usmani BA, Janeczko M, Shen R, Mazumdar M, Papandreou CN, Nanus DM. Analysis of the insertion/deletion polymorphism of the human angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) gene in patients with renal cancer. Br J Cancer 2000;82:550–2.[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Hajek D, Tomiska M, Krahulcova E, et al. I/D ACE gene polymorphism in survival of leukemia patients – hypothesis and pilot study. Med Hypotheses 2003;61:80–5.[CrossRef][Medline]
  36. Yokota T, Ishiyama S, Saito T, et al. Lymph node metastasis as a significant prognostic factor in gastric cancer: a multiple logistic regression analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004;39:380–4.[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
E. I. Ager, J. Neo, and C. Christophi
The renin-angiotensin system and malignancy
Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2008; 29(9): 1675 - 1684.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Exp. Biol. Med.Home page
A. Yaren, I. Oztop, S. Turgut, G. Turgut, S. Degirmencioglu, and M. Demirpence
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Gene Polymorphism Is Associated with Anemia in Non Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Experimental Biology and Medicine, January 1, 2008; 233(1): 32 - 37.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
M. Sugimoto, T. Furuta, N. Shirai, C. Kodaira, M. Nishino, M. Ikuma, H. Sugimura, and A. Hishida
Role of angiotensinogen gene polymorphism on Helicobacter pylori infection-related gastric cancer risk in Japanese
Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2007; 28(9): 2036 - 2040.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
C. Rocken, F.-W. Rohl, E. Diebler, U. Lendeckel, M. Pross, S. Carl-McGrath, and M. P.A. Ebert
The Angiotensin II/Angiotensin II Receptor System Correlates with Nodal Spread in Intestinal Type Gastric Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2007; 16(6): 1206 - 1212.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. Sugimoto, T. Furuta, N. Shirai, M. Ikuma, H. Sugimura, and A. Hishida
Influences of chymase and Angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene polymorphisms on gastric cancer risks in Japan.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., October 1, 2006; 15(10): 1929 - 1934.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. P.A. Ebert, U. Lendeckel, S. Westphal, J. Dierkes, J. Glas, C. Folwaczny, A. Roessner, M. Stolte, P. Malfertheiner, and C. Rocken
The Angiotensin I-Converting Enzyme Gene Insertion/Deletion Polymorphism Is Linked to Early Gastric Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2005; 14(12): 2987 - 2989.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Röcken, C.
Right arrow Articles by Ebert, M. P.A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Röcken, C.
Right arrow Articles by Ebert, M. P.A.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online