OBJECTIVE: FAS/FASL gene promoter polymorphisms have been repeatedly associated with gastric cancer risk, but findings are inconclusive across studies. To address a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. METHODS: Data were collected from the Pubmed, Medline and EMBASE databases, with the last report up to 1 December, 2011. Crude ORs with 95% CIs were used to assess the strength of the association by (1) the additive, (2) the codominant, (3) the dominant, and (4) the recessive models. RESULTS: A total of seven studies, including six studies on FAS -1377G>A polymorphism, five studies on FAS -670A>G polymorphism, and six studies on FASL -844T>C polymorphism, were identified in the current meta-analysis. Overall, an association of FAS -1377G>A (AA versus GG: OR = 1.313, 95% CI = 1.045-1.650, Ph = 0.347, I2 = 10.8) and FASL -844T>C (CC versus TT: OR = 1.352, 95% CI = 1.043-1.752, Ph = 0.461, I2 = 0.0) polymorphisms with gastric cancer was found in the codominant model. However, we did not detect any association between gastric cancer and the FAS -670A>G polymorphism. In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, similar elevated risks were also observed in Asian population for FAS -1377G>A (AA versus GG: OR = 1.309, 95% CI = 1.041- 1.646, Ph = 0.240, I2 = 27.3) and FASL -844T>C (CC versus TT: OR = 1.420, 95% CI = 1.081-1.865, Ph = 0.524, I2 = 0.0) polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that FAS -1377G>A and FASL -844T>C polymorphisms might be associated with gastric cancer risk.
OBJECTIVE:FAS/FASL gene promoter polymorphisms have been repeatedly associated with gastric cancer risk, but findings are inconclusive across studies. To address a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. METHODS: Data were collected from the Pubmed, Medline and EMBASE databases, with the last report up to 1 December, 2011. Crude ORs with 95% CIs were used to assess the strength of the association by (1) the additive, (2) the codominant, (3) the dominant, and (4) the recessive models. RESULTS: A total of seven studies, including six studies on FAS -1377G>A polymorphism, five studies on FAS -670A>G polymorphism, and six studies on FASL -844T>C polymorphism, were identified in the current meta-analysis. Overall, an association of FAS -1377G>A (AA versus GG: OR = 1.313, 95% CI = 1.045-1.650, Ph = 0.347, I2 = 10.8) and FASL -844T>C (CC versus TT: OR = 1.352, 95% CI = 1.043-1.752, Ph = 0.461, I2 = 0.0) polymorphisms with gastric cancer was found in the codominant model. However, we did not detect any association between gastric cancer and the FAS -670A>G polymorphism. In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, similar elevated risks were also observed in Asian population for FAS -1377G>A (AA versus GG: OR = 1.309, 95% CI = 1.041- 1.646, Ph = 0.240, I2 = 27.3) and FASL -844T>C (CC versus TT: OR = 1.420, 95% CI = 1.081-1.865, Ph = 0.524, I2 = 0.0) polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that FAS -1377G>A and FASL -844T>C polymorphisms might be associated with gastric cancer risk.
Authors: Bárbara B Santana; Maria Luana C Viégas; Simone R S S Conde; Marluísa O G Ishak; Ricardo Ishak; Antonio C R Vallinoto Journal: Dis Markers Date: 2013-11-17 Impact factor: 3.434