4.3 Review

Association of CD14-260 (-159) C/T and Alzheimer's disease: systematic review and trial sequential analyses

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURAL TRANSMISSION
Volume 125, Issue 9, Pages 1313-1318

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00702-018-1896-y

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; CD14; rs2569190; Polymorphism; Trial sequential analysis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30973162, 81302738]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current studies have evaluated the association between CD14-260 (also known as -159) C/T polymorphism and Alzheimer's disease (AD) susceptibility. However, the association remains inconclusive. The aim of this study was to draw an accurate conclusion of the association. The literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biological Medicine Database, and Wanfang Databases for related articles. Four case-control studies with a total of 868 cases and 766 controls were eligible to be included in this meta-analysis. The association was evaluated by calculating the odds ratios (ORs) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Overall, there was no significant association between CD14-260C/T polymorphism and AD risk in all genetic models (the allele model T vs. C: OR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.21, p = 0.44; the homozygous model TT vs. CC: OR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.83-1.44, p = 0.53; the heterozygote model CT vs. CC: OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.22, p = 0.71; the dominant model TT + CT vs. CC: OR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.84-1.32, p = 0.66; the recessive model TT vs. CT + CC: OR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.92-1.43, p = 0.24). The sample size of 5064 was calculated by applying trial sequential analysis. Cumulative z curve does not cross trial sequential monitoring boundary. In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggests that the CD14-260C/T polymorphism may not be associated with genetic susceptibility of AD, but the association remains indeterminate due to the insufficient evidence.

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