4.7 Article

Association between Interleukin-6 Gene Polymorphisms and Rheumatoid Arthritis in Chinese Han Population: A Case-Control Study and A Meta-analysis

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep05714

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30801025]
  2. Excellent Young Scientist Foundation of Shandong Province [2006BS03018]
  3. Shandong Province medicine health development plan [2013WS0120]
  4. Technology Foundation for Selected Overseas Chinese Scholar

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the possible association in the interleukin-6 (IL-6) gene with Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Chinese Han population from Shandong Province. Target regions of IL-6 gene were amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and genotyped. A logistic regression analysis was performed to detect potential associations in our case-control sample, the odd ratio(OR) and 95% confidence intervals(CIs) were calculated. Furthermore, we systematically tracked all the published studies in the field and performed a meta-analysis for the single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) under study. 256 RA patients and 331 healthy controls were recruited into the case-control study. We found allele frequencies of rs1800795, rs1800797 and rs1474347 in RA patients differ from control subjects (P = 0.016, 0.024, 0.020, respectively). Significant difference was observed in haplotype frequencies of GCCGCT between RA patients and controls (P = 0.0001, OR = 4.066, 95%CI = 1.891 similar to 8.746), while GGCGCT frequencies was found lower in RA than controls (P=0.006, OR = 0.669, 95%CI = 0.501 similar to 0.894). The results of the meta-analysis showed association polymorphism within the IL-6 promoter with RA. These findings suggest that rare IL-6 gene polymorphisms may associate with RA susceptibility in Han Chinese populations; however further studies are needed to assess the validity of the association of IL-6 with RA.

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

4.7
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