4.6 Review

The Factor XII -4C>T Variant and Risk of Common Thrombotic Disorders: A HuGE Review and Meta-Analysis of Evidence From Observational Studies

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 173, Issue 2, Pages 136-144

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwq349

Keywords

factor XII; F12; meta-analysis; myocardial infarction; polymorphism; genetic; pulmonary embolism; venous thromboembolism; venous thrombosis

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP 86466]
  2. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada [T 6484]
  3. France-Canada Research Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Coagulation factor XII is involved in thrombus formation and therefore may play a role in the etiology of thrombotic disorders. A common variant in the factor XII (F12) gene (-4C > T, rs1801020) results in decreased plasma levels of this coagulation factor. The existence of associations between low factor XII levels or F12 variants and thrombotic outcomes has been debated for more than a decade. The authors conducted a review and meta-analysis to evaluate the evidence for an association between F12 -4C > T and 2 common thrombotic outcomes: venous thromboembolism and myocardial infarction, which are hypothesized to share some etiologic pathways. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and HuGE Navigator were searched through July 2009 to identify relevant epidemiologic studies, and data were summarized using random-effects meta-analysis. Sixteen candidate gene studies (4,386 cases, 40,089 controls) were analyzed. None of the investigated contrasts reached statistical significance at P < 0.05, apart from a very weak association with myocardial infarction for the TT + CT versus CC contrast (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.00, 1.27). Overall, based on the synthesis of observational studies, the evidence for an association between F12 -4C > T and venous thromboembolism and myocardial infarction is weak.

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