| Literature DB >> 23620777 |
Dongmei Wu1, Zhizhong Zhang, Haiyan Chu, Ming Xu, Yao Xue, Haixia Zhu, Zhengdong Zhang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: P53 is a tumor suppressor gene and plays important role in the etiology of breast cancer. Intron 3 sixteen-bp duplication polymorphism of p53 has been reported to be associated with breast cancer risk. However, the reported results remain conflicting rather than conclusive.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23620777 PMCID: PMC3631160 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061662
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Gene structure of P53 gene and location of intron 3 16-bp duplication polymorphism (rs17878362).
Figure 2Flow diagram of the literature search.
Main characteristics of selected studies.
| First author | Year | Country | Ethnicity | Sample size case/control | Source of controls | Genotyping method | Matching | |
| Age | Sex | |||||||
| Sjalander | 1996 | Sweden | — | 212/689 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Weston | 1997 | America | European | 65/117 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Wang-Gohrke | 2002 | Germany | — | 563/549 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Suspitsin | 2003 | Russia | European | 529/249 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Buyru | 2007 | Turkey | — | 115/63 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Zhang | 2007 | China | Asian | 83/167 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Cavallone | 2008 | Canada | European | 157/112 | Population | Sequence | - | Yes |
| Costa | 2008 | Portugal | — | 261/656 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Gaudet | 2008 | America | — | 578/390 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| De Vecchi | 2008 | Italy | — | 350/352 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | - | Yes |
| Akkiprik | 2009 | Turkey | European | 97/107 | Population | AS-PCR | Yes | Yes |
| Hrstka | 2009 | Czech | — | 117/108 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Ma | 2009 | China | Asian | 117/123 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Bisof | 2010 | Croatia | — | 95/108 | Population | Taqman | Yes | Yes |
| Trifa | 2010 | Tunisia | African | 159/132 | Population | PCR-RFLP | - | Yes |
| Jakubowska | 2010 | Poland | European | 311/287 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Alawadi | 2010 | Syrians&Kuwaiti | Asian | 229/133 | Hospital | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Faghani | 2011 | Iran | Asian | 145/145 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
| Cherdyntseva | 2012 | Russia | European | 296/196 | Population | PCR-RFLP | Yes | Yes |
PCR-RFLP, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism; AS-PCR, allele specific- polymerase chain reaction.
Results of pooled ORs in the meta-analysis.
| Variables | N | Del/Ins vs. Del/Del | Ins/Ins vs. Del/Del | Ins/Ins+Del/Ins vs. Del/Del | Ins/Ins vs. Del/Del+Del/Ins | ||||
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| ||
| Total | 19 | 1.18 (1.00–1.40) | 0.001 | 1.42 (1.09–1.84) | 0.079 | 1.21 (1.03–1.41) | 0.001 | 1.28 (0.87–1.89) | 0.038 |
| Ethnicities | |||||||||
| Asian | 4 | 1.76 (0.73–4.28) | 0.001 | 0.53 (0.23–1.23) | - | 1.67 (0.66–4.24) | <0.001 | 0.43 (0.19–0.97) | - |
| European | 6 | 1.04 (0.84–1.28) | 0.273 | 1.07 (0.60–1.91) | 0.699 | 1.05 (0.84–1.32) | 0.172 | 1.09 (0.62–1.92) | 0.774 |
| African | 1 | 1.20 (0.73–1.97) | - | 0.88 (0.25–3.13) | - | 1.16 (0.72–1.88) | - | 0.82 (0.23–2.91) | - |
| Source of controls | |||||||||
| Population-based | 12 | 1.23 (0.90–1.41) | 0.001 | 1.26 (0.88–1.81) | 0.712 | 1.15 (0.92–1.43) | 0.001 | 1.24 (0.86–1.77) | 0.709 |
| Hospital-based | 7 | 1.26 (0.99–1.61) | 0.087 | 1.58 (0.75–3.34) | 0.008 | 1.25 (1.07–1.46) | 0.141 | 1.47 (0.66–3.31) | 0.002 |
| Sample size | |||||||||
| ≤500 | 12 | 1.31 (0.95–1.80) | <0.001 | 1.20 (0.74–1.95) | 0.271 | 1.33 (0.98–1.81) | <0.001 | 1.08 (0.67–1.75) | 0.180 |
| >500 | 7 | 1.08 (0.96–1.22) | 0.600 | 1.52 (1.11–2.08) | 0.065 | 1.12 (0.99–1.26) | 0.525 | 1.49 (1.10–2.03) | 0.057 |
Number of comparisons.
P value of Q-test for heterogeneity test. Random-effects model was used when P-value for heterogeneity test<0.05; otherwise, fix-effects model was used.
Figure 3Forest plot of breast cancer risk associated with the p53 intron 3 16-bp duplication polymorphism (Del/Ins vs Del/Del).
Figure 4Forest plot of breast cancer risk associated with the p53 intron 3 16-bp duplication polymorphism (Ins/Ins vs Del/Del).
Figure 5Forest plot of breast cancer risk associated with the p53 intron 3 16-bp duplication polymorphism (Ins/Ins+Del/Ins vs Del/Del).
Figure 6Forest plot of breast cancer risk associated with the p53 intron 3 16-bp duplication polymorphism (Ins/Ins vs Del/Del+Del/Ins).
Figure 7Results of the cumulative meta-analysis (Ins/Ins+Del/Ins vs Del/Del).
The random effects pooled OR with 95% CI at the end of each information step is shown.
Figure 8Funnel plot for publication bias test (Ins/Ins vs Del/Del).