4.4 Article

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Polymorphisms and Psoriasis

期刊

DERMATOLOGY
卷 237, 期 1, 页码 39-45

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000502255

关键词

Tumor necrosis factor-α Polymorphisms; Psoriasis; Meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This meta-analysis revealed significant associations between specific TNF-alpha polymorphisms and psoriasis, especially in high-risk Caucasian and East Asian populations.
Background: Some previous studies already explored associations between tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) polymorphisms and psoriasis, with conflicting findings. Here, we aimed to better analyze the relationship between TNF-alpha polymorphisms and psoriasis in a larger pooled population by performing a meta-analysis. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and CNKI for related articles. We calculated OR and 95% CI to estimate whether there are genetic associations between TNF-alpha polymorphisms and psoriasis. Results: Twenty-nine studies were included for this meta-analysis. TNF-alpha-238 G/A (dominant comparison: OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34-0.59; recessive comparison: OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03-2.57; overdominant comparison: OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.71-2.85; allele comparison: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.62) and -857 C/T (dominant comparison: OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.41-0.80; overdominant comparison: OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.12-2.23; allele comparison: OR 0.62, 95% CI 0. 0.47-0.82) polymorphisms were found to be significantly associated with psoriasis in the general population. Subgroup analyses indicated that the -238 G/A polymorphism was significantly associated with psoriasis in Caucasians and East Asians, the -308 G/A polymorphism was significantly associated with psoriasis in East Asians, and the -857 C/T polymorphism was significantly associated with psoriasis in Caucasians. Conclusions: TNF-alpha -238 G/A, -308 G/A and -857 C/T polymorphisms could be used to identity individuals with elevated susceptibility to psoriasis in certain populations.

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

4.4
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