4.6 Review

Individual effects of GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms on cervical or ovarian cancer risk: An updated meta-analysis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN GENETICS
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.1074570

关键词

GSTT1; GSTM1; cervical cancer; ovarian cancer; BFDP; FPRP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the association between GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes and the risk of cervical or ovarian cancer. The overall analysis showed that GSTM1 null genotype was associated with increased risk of cervical cancer, while GSTT1 null genotype was not significantly associated with cervical cancer. For ovarian cancer, GSTM1 null genotype was associated with increased risk in East Asia, and GSTT1 null genotype was associated with increased risk in South America. However, the confidence of these associations was low.
Background: Studies have shown that glutathione S-transferase M1 (GSTM1) and. glutathione S-transferase T1 (GSTT1) null genotype may increase the risk of cervical cancer (CC) or ovarian cancer (OC), however, the results of published original studies and meta-analyses are inconsistent. Objectives: To investigate the association between GSTM1 present/null and GSTT1 present/null polymorphisms, with the risk of cervical cancer or ovarian cancer. Methods: The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the association between GSTM1 present/null and GSTT1 present/null polymorphisms and the risk of cervical cancer or ovarian cancer. To assess the confidence of statistically significant associations, we applied false positive reporting probability (FPRP) and bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP) tests. Results: Overall analysis showed that GSTM1 null was associated with an increased risk of cervical cancer, and subgroup analysis showed a significant increase in cervical cancer risk in Indian and Chinese populations; GSTT1 was not found null genotype are significantly associated with cervical cancer. Overall analysis showed that GSTM1 and GSTT1 null were not associated with the risk of ovarian cancer, subgroup analysis showed that GSTM1 null was associated with an increased risk of OC in East Asia, and GSTT1 null was associated with an increased risk of OC in South America. However, when we used false positive reporting probability and bayesian false discovery probability to verify the confidence of a significant association, all positive results showed low confidence (FPRP > .2, BFDP > .8). Conclusion: Overall, this study strongly suggests that all positive results should be interpreted with caution and are likely a result of missing plausibility rather than a true association.

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