4.5 Article

Association of IL-6 polymorphisms with gastric cancer risk: Evidences from a meta-analysis

Journal

CYTOKINE
Volume 59, Issue 1, Pages 176-183

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cyto.2012.03.032

Keywords

Gastric cancer; Interleukin-6; Polymorphisms; Meta-analysis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [81060243]
  2. Foundation of the Education Department of Guangxi Province, China [201010LX375]
  3. Foundation of the Health Department of Guangxi Province, China [2010059]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The findings of associations between IL-6 polymorphisms and risk of gastric cancer are controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of the IL-6 gene to provide evidences for the current understanding of the genetic association with gastric cancer. We searched for relevant studies without language restriction in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library published up to November 2011. The strengths of the associations between IL-6 polymorphisms and gastric cancer risk were estimated by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We identified seven case-control studies involving 1364 gastric cancer cases and 1748 controls for the analysis. Because of limited eligible data, our meta-analysis specifically focused on three SNPs of the IL-6 gene, -174 G/C, -572 G/C and -597 G/A. We found no significant associations of IL-6-174 G/C, -572 G/C and -597 G/A polymorphisms with gastric cancer risk in the overall population (all p > 0.05). Subgroup analysis did not show significant associations in Asian population or Caucasian population either (all p > 0.05). Begg's test and Egger's test suggested no evidence of publication (all p > 0.05). Our findings showed that polymorphisms of IL-6-174 G/C, -572 G/C and -597 G/A are not associated with gastric cancer risk. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies available. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available