Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Null Results in Brief

DNA Promoter Methylation in Breast Tumors: No Association with Genetic Polymorphisms in MTHFR and MTR

Meng Hua Tao, Peter G. Shields, Jing Nie, Catalin Marian, Christine B. Ambrosone, Susan E. McCann, Mary Platek, Shiva S. Krishnan, Bin Xie, Stephen B. Edge, Janet Winston, Dominica Vito, Maurizio Trevisan and Jo L. Freudenheim
Meng Hua Tao
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter G. Shields
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jing Nie
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Catalin Marian
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christine B. Ambrosone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Susan E. McCann
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mary Platek
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shiva S. Krishnan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bin Xie
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen B. Edge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Janet Winston
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dominica Vito
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maurizio Trevisan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jo L. Freudenheim
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0916 Published March 2009
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Aberrant promoter methylation is recognized as an important feature of breast carcinogenesis. We hypothesized that genetic variation of genes for methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) and methionine synthase (MTR), two critical enzymes in the one-carbon metabolism, may alter DNA methylation levels and thus influence DNA methylation in breast cancer. We evaluated case-control association of MTHFR C677T, A1298C, and MTR A2756G polymorphisms for cases strata-defined by promoter methylation status for each of three genes, E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2 in breast cancer; in addition, we evaluated case-case comparisons of the likelihood of promoter methylation in relation to genotypes using a population-based case-control study conducted in Western New York State. Methylation was evaluated with real-time methylation-specific PCRs for 803 paraffin-embedded breast tumor tissues from women with primary, incident breast cancer. We applied unordered polytomous regression and unconditional logistic regression to derive adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. We did not find any association of MTHFR and MTR polymorphisms with breast cancer risk stratified by methylation status nor between polymorphisms and likelihood of promoter methylation of any of the genes. There was no evidence of difference within strata defined by menopausal status, estrogen receptor status, folate intake, and lifetime alcohol consumption. Overall, we found no evidence that these common polymorphisms of the MTHFR and MTR genes are associated with promoter methylation of E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2 genes in breast cancer. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(3):998–1002)

  • promoter methylation
  • MTHFR
  • MTR
  • breast cancer
  • epidemiology

Introduction

Both CpG island promoter hypermethylation and global DNA hypomethylation are prominent features of breast tumors and are important in the carcinogenic process (1, 2). However, the factors that result in aberrant DNA methylation in normal and neoplastic tissues are not well known. The one-carbon metabolism, critical in the availability of methyl groups and therefore DNA methylation, may affect both hypomethylation and hypermethylation (3). We examined whether common genetic variations of one-carbon metabolism genes, specifically methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) and methionine synthase (MTR), are associated with promoter methylation of the three genes selected because they are functionally important and have been found to be methylated in breast tumors and may therefore influence breast carcinogenesis: E-cadherin, involved in cell adhesion (4); p16, important in cell cycle regulation (5); and retinoic acid binding receptor-β2 (RAR-β2), important in receptor-mediated cell signaling (6). These associations were examined in a case-control study of primary, incident breast cancers, examining the association between MTHFR and MTR polymorphisms and breast cancer risk by tumor methylation status as well as the likelihood of methylation in tumors by genotype.

Materials and Methods

Detailed study methods have been published previously (7). In brief, the Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer Study included 1,170 primary, histologically confirmed, incident breast cancer cases, ages 35 to 79 at diagnosis and 2,115 randomly selected population controls, frequency-matched to cases on age and race. Extensive in-person interviews and self-administered questionnaires were administered to participants including queries on demographic factors and breast cancer risk factors. The response rates were 72% for cases and 63% for controls. Information on tumor size, histologic grade, and cancer stage was abstracted from medical charts using a standard protocol. Estrogen receptor (ER) status was determined by immunohistochemistry as described previously (7). DNA was extracted from blood and mouthwash samples using the GenQuik DNA Extraction Kit (BioServe Biotechnologies, Ltd.). Archived tumor blocks were obtained from 920 (78.6%) breast cancer cases.

The allelic discrimination of the MTHFR C677T, A1298C, and MTR A2756G polymorphisms were assessed by real-time PCR with TaqMan genotyping assay with primers, probes, and conditions as described on the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Genome Anatomy Project SNP500 Cancer Database web site.6 Promoter methylation of E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2 was determined by real-time methylation-specific PCR after bisulfite modification of genomic tumor DNA isolated from archived paraffin-embedded tissues of 803 breast cancer tumors (described in detailed previously; ref. 7).

The exact χ2 goodness-of-fit test was used to test the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium of the genotypes. Characteristics of participating cases with and without promoter methylation of specific genes and controls were compared using the ANOVA test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. For comparisons of cases with and without promoter methylation to controls, odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using polytomous logistic regression. Unconditional logistic regression was used for case-case comparisons of those with and without promoter methylation to estimate the ORs and 95% CIs for the associations of MTHFR and MTR genotypes with promoter methylation in breast cancer. Interactions between genotype and menopause, ER status, folate intake, or alcohol intake were evaluated by evaluation of a multiplicative term in the regression model. All analyses were adjusted by age and race. For case-case comparisons, we also adjusted for ER status. Potential confounding effects of other demographic factors and known breast cancer risk factors were also examined, and the results changed by <10% (data not shown). All statistical tests were based on two-sided probability. All statistical analyses were done using SAS version 9.1 (SAS Institute).

Results

The frequencies of genotypes of MTR and MTHFR polymorphisms for cases and controls and distributions of selected characteristic factors are shown in Table 1 . All polymorphisms were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium for cases and controls in both the whole population and in Caucasians only. The distributions of MTR and MTHFR polymorphisms were similar for cases with or without E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2 gene promoter methylation.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Distribution of one-carbon metabolism genes among breast cancer cases, cases with (M) and without (UM) promoter methylation and controls (Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer Study, 1996-2001)

The results of case-case and case-control comparisons evaluating the associations between MTR A2756G and MTHFR C677T and C1298A genotypes and breast tumors with or without promoter methylation are presented in Table 2 . In case-control comparisons, we did not find any association between MTHFR and MTR polymorphisms with breast cancer risk stratified by methylation status. In case-case analyses, there was no association between MTR A2756G, MTHFR C677T, or C1298A polymorphisms and E-cadherin, p16, or RAR-β2 gene methylation in breast tumors for both premenopausal and postmenopausal women. We also analyzed the above relations using dominant and recessive models of inheritance in both case-control comparisons and case-case comparisons, however, no associations were observed. In addition, results of analyses stratified by ER status, folate intake, and lifetime alcohol intake were similar; there were no interactions and all values for interaction tests were P > 0.05. For the joint effects of MTR and MTHFR genotypes on the likelihood of promoter methylation in at least one gene, compared with the MTR 2756AA, MTHFR 677CC, and 1298AA genotype, women with breast cancer with more variant alleles for either MTR 2756G, MTHFR 677T, or 1298C alleles tend to increase the likelihood of promoter methylation in at least one gene, although associations were not statistically significant and there was no trend (ORs, 1.21, 1.30, and 1.45; 95% CIs, 0.65-2.22, 0.70-2.41, and 0.72-2.91 for women with any one, any two, and three variant alleles, respectively).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Associations of MTR and MTHFR genotypes and gene promoter methylation: ORs (95% CIs) for comparisons of controls to cases with promoter methylation (M), to cases without methylation (UM), and case-case comparisons

Discussion

MTHFR and MTR are key enzymes in the biosynthesis of 5-methyl tetrahydrofolate and methionine, which are precursors for DNA methylation reactions; and these enzymes' activities also affect the availability of tetrahydrofolate for nucleotide biosynthesis (3). MTHFR C677T and A1298C variants are associated with a reduction of enzyme activity (8, 9) and the MTR A2756G variant is associated with lower homocysteine concentrations (10, 11), and have been investigated for their possible effect on breast carcinogenesis with inconsistent results (12-17).

Polymorphisms of MTHFR C677T and A1298C and MTR A2756G have been investigated in relation to promoter methylation of genes in breast tumors in one other study of 227 breast cancer cases. Consistent with our findings, no association was observed between MTHFR C677T and MTR A2756G polymorphisms and the frequency of promoter methylation in seven genes, including E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2, in breast cancer (18). In our study, we also found that this association was not modified by menopausal status, ER status, folate intake, or total alcohol intake.

There have been studies examining these genotypes with promoter methylation of genes in tumors from other sites with inconsistent results (19-26). Curtin et al. found an increased likelihood of highly CpG-methylated phenotype in colon tumors for those with one or two variant MTHFR 1298C alleles, and the association was modified by high-risk dietary profiles (low folate and methionine intake and high alcohol use; ref. 19). In other studies, these genotypes were not associated with the likelihood of p16 promoter hypermethylation of colorectal cancers (20-22). Similarly, MTHFR C677T, A1298C, or MTR C2756G genotypes were not associated with E-cadherin and p16 promoter methylation in esophageal (23) and cervical cancers (25).

The strengths of our study include the population-based study design and a relatively large sample size, leading to more stable risk estimates. Nevertheless, the number of cases in subgroups were small and the CIs were wide. We had 80% power to detect ORs of 2.5 for the association between MTR genotype and methylation and an OR of 2.0 for the association between MTHFR polymorphisms and methylation. Additionally, the study applied the candidate gene approach and primarily focused on potential common genetic variants (>5%) and polymorphisms with amino acid changes. We cannot rule out the possibility that genetic polymorphisms of one-carbon metabolisms other than those included in our study may be related to the likelihood of methylation. Given multiple genes for proteins involved in one-carbon metabolism (3), the confounding and/or modifying effects of other genes also cannot be excluded. Further lack of response among cases has potential for selection bias. Compared with participating cases, those nonparticipants were of a somewhat lower education level and older. However, the two groups were similar in terms of tumor stage, distant metastases, and other breast cancer risk factors. Furthermore, our inability to obtain the paraffin-embedded breast tumor tissue for all cases may have led to bias. In comparisons of cases without available archived tumor tissue to those with available tissue, those with tissue were somewhat younger at diagnosis and had a higher tumor-node-metastasis stage of breast tumor. However, the two groups were similar in terms of tumor size, histologic grade, nuclear grade, ER and progesterone receptor status. With regard to the validity of the measure of methylation in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue, a recent study showed a high correlation in methylation between paraffin-embedded tumor tissues and fresh samples from the same subject, measured with a similar real-time PCR method as ours, concluding that paraffin-embedded samples are well suited for methylation assessment (27).

In summary, we found no evidence that these common polymorphisms of the MTHFR and MTR genes were associated with the prevalence of promoter methylation of E-cadherin, p16, and RAR-β2 genes in breast tumors.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

This study would not have been possible without the support of all the study participants and the research staff of the Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer Study.

Footnotes

  • ↵6 http://snp500cancer.nci.nih.gov

  • Grant support: U.S. Public Health Service grant no. R01CA92585 from the National Cancer Institute, Department of Defense grant nos. DAMD 170310446 and DAMD 170010417, and in part by the Department of Defense (DAMD 179616202 and DAMD 17030446), U.S. Public Health Service National Cancer Institute (R01CA 092040), and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (P50 AA09802).

    • Accepted December 10, 2008.
    • Received September 30, 2008.
    • Revision received November 26, 2008.

References

  1. ↵
    Szyf M, Pakneshan P, Rabbani SA. DNA methylation and breast cancer. Biochem Pharmacol 2004;68:1187–97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Agrawal A, Murphy RF, Agrawal DK. DNA methylation in breast and colorectal cancers. Mod Pathol 2007;20:711–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Choi SW, Mason JB. Folate status: effects on pathways of colorectal carcinogenesis. J Nutr 2002;132:2413–8S.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    Graff JR, Herman JG, Lapidus RG, et al. E-cadherin expression is silenced by DNA hypermethylation in human breast and prostate carcinomas. Cancer Res 1995;55:5195–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Esteller M, Corn PG, Baylin SB, et al. A gene hypermethylation profile of human cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:3225–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Widschwendter M, Jones PA. DNA methylation and breast carcinogenesis. Oncogene 2002;21:5462–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Tao MH, Shields SP, Nie J, et al. DNA hypermethylation and clinicopathological features in breast cancer: the Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer (WEB) Study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. Epub ahead of print 2008.
  8. ↵
    Frosst P, Blom HJ, Milos R, et al. A candidate genetic risk factor for vascular disease: a common mutation in methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase. Nat Genet 1995;10:111–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Weisberg IS, Jacques PF, Selhub J, et al. The 1298A->C polymorphism in methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR): in vitro expression and association with homocysteine. Atherosclerosis 2001;156:409–15.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    Sharp L, Little J. Polymorphisms in genes involved in folate metabolism and colorectal neoplasia: a HuGE review. Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:423–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Harmon DL, Shields DC, Woodside JV, et al. Methionine synthase D919G polymorphism is a significant but modest determinant of circulating homocysteine concentrations. Genet Epidemiol 1999;17:298–309.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Macis D, Maisonneuve P, Johansson H, et al. Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) and breast cancer risk: a nested-case-control study and a pooled meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;106:263–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. Stevens VL, McCullough ML, Pavluck AL, et al. Association of polymorphisms in one-carbon metabolism genes and postmenopausal breast cancer incidence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:1140–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. Lewis SJ, Harbord RM, Harris R, et al. Meta-analyses of observational and genetic association studies of folate intakes or levels and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1607–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. Lissowska J, Gaudet MM, Brinton LA, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in the one-carbon metabolism pathway and breast cancer risk: a population-based case-control study and meta-analyses. Int J Cancer 2007;120:2696–703.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. Shrubsole MJ, Gao YT, Cai Q, et al. MTR and MTRR polymorphisms, dietary intake, and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:586–8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Justenhoven C, Hamann U, Pierl CB, et al. One-carbon metabolism and breast cancer risk: no association of MTHFR, MTR, and TYMS polymorphisms in the GENICA study from Germany. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:3015–8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    Li SY, Rong M, Iacopetta B. Germ-line variants in methyl-group metabolism genes and susceptibility to DNA methylation in human breast cancer. Oncol Rep 2006;15:221–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    Curtin K, Slattery ML, Ulrich CM, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in one-carbon metabolism: associations with CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in colon cancer and the modifying effects of diet. Carcinogenesis 2007;28:1672–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Clarizia AD, Bastos-Rodrigues L, Pena H, et al. Relationship of the thylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T polymorphism with microsatellite instability and promoter hypermethylation in sporadic colorectal cancer. Genet Mol Res 2006;5:315–22.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. Kawakami K, Ruszkiewicz A, Bennett G, et al. DNA hypermethylation in the normal colonic mucosa of patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2006;94:593–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    van den Donk M, van Engeland M, Pellis L, et al. Dietary folate intake in combination with MTHFR C677T genotype and promoter methylation of tumor suppressor and DNA repair genes in sporadic colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:327–33.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    Wang JM, Sasco AJ, Fu CW, et al. Aberrant DNA methylation of P16, MGMT, and hMLH1 genes in combination with MTHFR C677T genetic polymorphism in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17:118–25.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. Kraunz KS, Hsiung D, McClean MD, et al. Dietary folate is associated with p16INK4A methylaiton in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Cancer 2006;119:1553–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    Kang S, Kim JW, Kang GH, et al. Polymorphism in folate- and methionine-metabolizing enzyme and aberrant CpG island hypermethylation in uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2005;96:173–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Siraj AK, Ibrahim M, Al-Rasheed M, et al. Genetic polymorphisms of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase and promoter methylation of MGMT and FHIT genes in diffuse large B cell lymphoma risk in Middle East. Ann Hematol 2007;86:887–95.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    Harbeck N, Nimmrich I, Hartmann A, et al. Multicenter study using paraffin-embedded tumor tissue testing PITX2 DNA methylation as a marker for outcome prediction in tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:5036–42.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 18 (3)
March 2009
Volume 18, Issue 3
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
DNA Promoter Methylation in Breast Tumors: No Association with Genetic Polymorphisms in MTHFR and MTR
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
DNA Promoter Methylation in Breast Tumors: No Association with Genetic Polymorphisms in MTHFR and MTR
Meng Hua Tao, Peter G. Shields, Jing Nie, Catalin Marian, Christine B. Ambrosone, Susan E. McCann, Mary Platek, Shiva S. Krishnan, Bin Xie, Stephen B. Edge, Janet Winston, Dominica Vito, Maurizio Trevisan and Jo L. Freudenheim
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2009 (18) (3) 998-1002; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0916

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
DNA Promoter Methylation in Breast Tumors: No Association with Genetic Polymorphisms in MTHFR and MTR
Meng Hua Tao, Peter G. Shields, Jing Nie, Catalin Marian, Christine B. Ambrosone, Susan E. McCann, Mary Platek, Shiva S. Krishnan, Bin Xie, Stephen B. Edge, Janet Winston, Dominica Vito, Maurizio Trevisan and Jo L. Freudenheim
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2009 (18) (3) 998-1002; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0916
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Diet Quality and Ovarian Cancer Survival
  • PDE5 inhibitors use and precursors of colorectal cancer
  • Association between serum iron biomarkers and breast cancer
Show more Null Results in Brief
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
eISSN: 1538-7755
ISSN: 1055-9965

Advertisement