4.4 Article

The-A2518G polymorphism in the MCP-1 gene and inflammatory bowel disease risk: A meta-analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 177-185

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.12232

关键词

inflammatory bowel disease; meta-analysis; monocyte chemoattractant protein-1; polymorphism; susceptibility

资金

  1. National Key Clinical Department in Ministry of Public Health, China [303004269002]
  2. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province [2012B031800087]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveThe monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) -A2518G gene polymorphism has been found to be involved in the susceptibility to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, the results of existing studies are controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the relationship between the MCP-1 -A2518G polymorphism and the risk of IBD. MethodsPubMed, EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for studies assessing the relationship between the -A2518G polymorphism in MCP-1 gene and the risk of IBD. Available data were extracted and statistically analyzed using STATA 12.0. ResultsA total of five publications involving 3137 individuals (1818 IBD cases and 1319 controls) were included in the meta-analysis. A combined analysis revealed that the MCP-1 -A2518G polymorphism in was a protective factor for GG+AGvsAA (OR0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.87, P=0.000). Subgroup analysis by ethnicity showed that among European patients the AG+GG homozygote, unlike the AA homozygote, had a protective effect against IBD (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63-0.84, P=0.000), but did not do so among Asian and African patients. Subgroup analysis by disease subtype suggested the -A2518G polymorphism in MCP-1 had a protective effect against Crohn's disease (OR0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.81, P=0.000), but not against ulcerative colitis. ConclusionsOur meta-analysis suggested that the -A2518G polymorphism in MCP-1 may be a protective factor for IBD in European populations. Further studies are required to confirm these findings.

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