OBJECTIVE: A role for the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene has been suggested in the aetiology of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). However, results have been inconsistent. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to further clarify the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM risk in a Chinese population. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI and Wan Fang Data were searched for eligible studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. RESULTS: : A total of 41 studies (4708 cases and 5368 controls) for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM in a Chinese population were identified. The pooled ORs for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM risk were not statistically significant under all genetic models (co-dominant model: DD vs. II: OR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.42 and ID vs. II: OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.93-1.10; dominant model: OR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19; multiplicative model: OR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.98-1.18). Although a marginally significant association was observed under a recessive model (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.36), robustness of this estimate could not be established under additional sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: : The meta-analysis presented in this study indicated that ACE I/D polymorphism may not be associated with the risk of T2DM in the Chinese population.
OBJECTIVE: A role for the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene has been suggested in the aetiology of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). However, results have been inconsistent. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to further clarify the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM risk in a Chinese population. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI and Wan Fang Data were searched for eligible studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. RESULTS: : A total of 41 studies (4708 cases and 5368 controls) for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM in a Chinese population were identified. The pooled ORs for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and T2DM risk were not statistically significant under all genetic models (co-dominant model: DD vs. II: OR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.42 and ID vs. II: OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.93-1.10; dominant model: OR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19; multiplicative model: OR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.98-1.18). Although a marginally significant association was observed under a recessive model (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.36), robustness of this estimate could not be established under additional sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: : The meta-analysis presented in this study indicated that ACE I/D polymorphism may not be associated with the risk of T2DM in the Chinese population.
Authors: Siew Mei Joyce-Tan; Shamsul Mohd Zain; Munavvar Zubaid Abdul Sattar; Nor Azizan Abdullah Journal: J Diabetes Res Date: 2015-11-22 Impact factor: 4.011
Authors: Mukta Wyawahare; Revathy Neelamegam; Saranya Vilvanathan; R Soundravally; A K Das; C Adithan Journal: Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes Date: 2017-08-29