4.6 Article

Meta- and pooled analyses of the cytochrome P-4501B1 Val432Leu polymorphism and breast cancer: A HuGE-GSEC review

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 165, 期 2, 页码 115-125

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwj365

关键词

breast neoplasms; CYP1B1; cytochrome P-450 enzyme system; genetics; hormones; meta-analysis; polymorphism; genetic; review [publication type]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The association between the cytochrome P-450 1B1 (CYP1B1) Val432Leu polymorphism and breast cancer was assessed through a meta-analysis of all published case-control studies and a pooled analysis of both published and unpublished case-control studies from the Genetic Susceptibility to Environmental Carcinogens (GSEC) database (http://www.upci.upmc.edu/research/ccps/ccontrol/g_intro.html). GSEC is a collaborative project that gathers information on studies of metabolic gene polymorphisms and cancer. Thirteen articles were included in the meta-analysis (14,331 subjects; 7,514 cases, 6,817 controls); nine data sets were included in the pooled analysis (6,842 subjects; 3,391 cases, 3,451 controls). A summary meta- or pooled estimate of the association between the CYP1B1 Val432Leu polymorphism and breast cancer could not be calculated because of statistically significant heterogeneity in the point estimates among studies. No association between the CYP1B1 Val432Leu polymorphism and breast cancer was observed in Asians (for Val/Val and Val/Leu combined, odds ratio (OR) = 1.0, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8, 1.2). An inverse association was observed in populations of mixed/African origin (OR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.7, 0.9). The pooled analysis suggested a possible association in Caucasians (for Val/Val and Val/Leu combined, OR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1, 2.1), with effect modification across age categories. The observed effect of age on the association in Caucasians indicates that further studies are needed on the role of CYP1B1 Val432Leu in estrogen metabolism according to age, ethnicity, and menopausal status.

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