4.6 Article

Four common polymorphisms of BRIP1 (rs2048718, rs4988344, rs4986764, and rs6504074) and cancer risk: evidence from 13,716 cancer patients and 15,590 cancer-free controls

期刊

AGING-US
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 266-277

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.101388

关键词

BRIP1; polymorphism; cancer risk; meta-analysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81471670]
  2. Science and Technology Project of Shaanxi Province [2017SF-172]
  3. Key research and development plan, Shaanxi Province, People's Republic of China [2017ZDXM-SF-066]
  4. International Cooperative Project of Shaanxi province, China [2016KW-008]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China [2014gjhz11]
  6. BIKANG Funding [2017BIKANGJIJIN-020]
  7. Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University for Young Scientists, China [YJ(QN)201305]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous studies have showed the associations between various BRCA1-interacting protein 1 (BRIP1) polymorphisms and cancer risk. But, these results were inconsistent. This meta-analysis based on 18 studies involving 13,716 cancer patients and 15,590 cancer-free controls is aimed at to evaluate the relationship between the four common SNPs of BRIP1 (rs2048718, rs4988344, rs4986764, and rs6504074) and cancer risk. The results showed a decreased risk of rs2048718 or rs4986764 for cervical cancer rather than breast cancer in the overall population (P < 0.05). However, rs6504074 was associated with gynecologic cancer risk among overall population (P < 0.05). Further stratification analyses by ethnicity indicated that all 4 polymorphisms (rs2048718, rs4988344, rs4986764, and rs6504074) were strongly related to cancer susceptibility in Chinese people (P < 0.05). This meta-analysis showed that rs6504074 may play a decreased risk of gynecologic cancer in the overall population. Rs4988344, rs4986764, and rs6504074 were significantly related to decreasing cancer risk in Chinese population.

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