4.3 Article

Association between toll-like receptor polymorphisms and systemic lupus erythematosus: a meta-analysis update

Journal

LUPUS
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 593-601

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0961203315622823

Keywords

Toll-like receptor; polymorphism; systemic lupus erythematosus; meta-analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective The aim of this study was to determine whether polymorphisms of the Toll-like receptor (TLR) genes are associated with susceptibility to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods The authors conducted a meta-analysis of the relationship between 12 TLR polymorphisms and SLE susceptibility. Results In total, 26 studies that involved 11,984 patients and 14,572 controls were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed no association between the two alleles of the rs352140, rs5743836, and rs352139 polymorphisms of TLR9 and SLE, but indicated an association between the two alleles of the rs187084 polymorphism (TLR9) and SLE in the overall population (OR=0.869, 95% CI=0.762-0.992, P=0.038). No association was detected between rs3764880 (TLR8) and SLE; however, our meta-analysis indicated an association between rs3764879 (TLR8) and SLE in Caucasians (OR=1.414, 95% CI=1.139-1.756, P=0.002). An association between rs179008 (TLR7) and SLE was found in the African (OR=0.430, 95% CI=0.238-0.775, P=0.005), but not in the Caucasian population (OR=1.206, 95% CI=0.932-1.614, P=0.145). Furthermore, our meta-analysis indicated a significant association between rs3853839 (TLR7) and SLE in the Asian population (OR=0.773, 95% CI=0.735, 0.823, P<1.0x10(-9)). No associations were found between rs5744168 (TLR5), rs4986791 (TLR4), rs4986790 (TLR4), and rs3775291 (TLR3) polymorphisms and SLE susceptibility. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that TLR7, TLR8, and TLR9 polymorphisms are associated with the development of SLE in Caucasian, Asian, and African populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available