4.5 Article

Association between HLA-B*46 Allele and Graves Disease in Asian Populations: A Meta-Analysis

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 164-170

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/ijms.5158

关键词

HLA-B*46; Graves' disease; Meta-analysis; Asian populations

资金

  1. Foundation of Yunnan Provincial Education Department [09C0296]
  2. Specific Association Foundation Program of Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department and Kunming Medical University [2011FB226]
  3. Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department [2008CC021]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30900798]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graves' disease (GD) is a leading cause of hyperthyroidism, which affects 1.0-1.6% of the general population. Previous studies reported a higher GD prevalence in Asian populations compared to Caucasian populations. The etiology of GD involves complex interactions between predisposing genes and environmental triggers. Genetic studies have shown that the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) is an important candidate genetic region associated with GD in Asian populations. However, the results were inconsistent and inconclusive. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the role of the HLA-B*46 allele in GD in Asian populations. A total of 14 case-controlled studies on the association of the HLA-B*46 allele in 1743 GD patients and 5689 controls were included. Our results showed a trend toward an increased risk of GD in HLA-B*46-positive subjects compared to those HLA-B*46-negative (OR = 2.48; 95% CI = 1.96-3.13, P < 0.01). However, there were some limitations to the current meta-analysis, such as heterogeneity (P-heterogeneity < 0.01 and I-2 = 68.0%) or the different typing methods (serological and genotyping methods). The meta-analysis indicated that the HLA-B*46 allele is a risk factor for GD in Asian populations. Future studies on the role of the HLA-B*46 allele in GD should consider complications such as periodic paralysis, ophthalmopathy and recurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据