4.1 Article

Null Genotype of GSTT1 Contributes to Esophageal Cancer Risk in Asian Populations: Evidence from a Meta-analysis

期刊

ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 4967-4971

出版社

ASIAN PACIFIC ORGANIZATION CANCER PREVENTION
DOI: 10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.10.4967

关键词

Esophageal cancer; gene polymorphism; glutathione S-transferase T1; meta-analysis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: Glutathione S-transferase T1 (GSTT1), a phase-II enzyme, plays an important role in detoxification of carcinogen electrophiles. Many studies have investigated the association between GSTT1 polymorphism and esophageal cancer risk in Asian populations, but its actual impact is not clear owing to apparent inconsistencies among those studies. Thus, a meta-analysis was performed to explore the effect of GSTT1 polymorphism on the risk of developing esophageal cancer. Methods: A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Wanfang databases up to August 2012 was conducted and 15 eligible papers were finally selected, involving a total of 1,626 esophageal cancer cases and 2,216 controls. We used the pooled odds ratio (OR) with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to estimate the association of GSTT1 polymorphism with esophageal cancer risk. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed to further identify the association. Results: Meta-analysis of total studies showed the null genotype of GSTT1 was significantly associated with an increased risk of esophageal cancer in Asians (OR=1.26, 95% CI=1.05-1.52, P-OR=0.015, I-2=42.7%). Subgroup analyses by sample size and countries also identified a significant association. Sensitivity analysis further demonstrated a relationship of GSTT1 polymorphism to esophageal cancer risk in Asians. Conclusions: The present meta-analysis of available data showed a significant association between the null genotype of GSTT1 and an increased risk of esophageal cancer in Asians, particularly in China.

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

4.1
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