4.6 Review

Prevalence of BRCA mutations among hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer patients in Arab countries: systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 19, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5463-1

关键词

BRCA mutations; Familial breast cancer; Familial ovarian cancer; Arab countries; Systematic review; meta-analysis

类别

资金

  1. Qatar National Library

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundTo systematically assess the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in women with Hereditary Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) in Arab countries and to describe the variability in the BRCA gene mutations in different regions of the Arab world.MethodsObservational studies reporting prevalence of BRCA mutations from 22 Arab countries were systematically searched in databases including PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Two reviewers independently screened the studies and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Hoy's risk of Bias tool was used to assess the biases in individual studies. Due to substantial heterogeneity, pooled weighted estimates were calculated using Quality Effect Models (QEM) that adjust for bias, while the Random Effect Models (REM) estimates served as the sensitivity estimates.ResultsFourteen studies reporting prevalence of BRCA were included. The pooled estimate of BRCA among HBOC was 20% (95% CI: 7-36%). Subgroup analysis including only those with low risk of bias provided an estimate of 11% (95% CI: 1-27%). Levant region had higher prevalence 28% (95% CI: 11-49%) compared to Arabian Gulf region and North Africa but differences are not statistically significant, when tested using Z-test for proportions.ConclusionGiven the pooled estimates vary widely with substantial heterogeneity, larger, well-designed studies are warranted to better understand the frequency and the impact of BRCA gene mutations among Arab women.Trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018095905.

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

4.6
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