4.6 Review

Association Between Heme Oxygenase-1 Gene Promoter Polymorphisms and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A HuGE Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 172, Issue 6, Pages 631-636

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwq162

Keywords

diabetes mellitus; type 2; epidemiology; genetics; genome; human; heme oxygenase-1; meta-analysis; polymorphism; single nucleotide

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC-30872116]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several studies have recently focused on the association between heme oxygenase-1 (HMOX1) gene promoter polymorphisms and susceptibility to type 2 diabetes mellitus; however, results have been conflicting. This systematic Human Genome Epidemiology review and meta-analysis was undertaken to integrate previous findings and summarize the effect size of the association of HMOX1 gene promoter polymorphisms with susceptibility to type 2 diabetes. The authors retrieved all studies matched to search terms from the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases that had been published through December 31, 2009. The articles were then checked independently by 2 investigators according to the eligibility and exclusion criteria. For all alleles and genotypes, odds ratios were pooled using either fixed-effects or random-effects models. An increased odds ratio for type 2 diabetes was observed in persons with the (GT)(n) L (long) allele as compared with those with the (GT)(n) S (short) allele (odds ratio = 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.24; P = 0.02). Furthermore, the diabetes odds ratio for persons with the LL genotype, versus those with the SS genotype, was significantly increased (odds ratio = 1.25, 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 1.50; P = 0.02). Persons carrying longer (GT)(n) repeats in the HMOX1 gene promoter may have a higher risk of type 2 diabetes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available