| Literature DB >> 24632849 |
Mengying Liu1, Chen Bian2, Jiqiang Zhang2, Feng Wen3.
Abstract
The relationship between Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype and the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is relatively well established in Caucasians, but less established in other ethnicities. To examine the association between ApoE polymorphism and the onset of AD in Chinese population, we searched the commonly used electronic databases between January 2000 and November 2013 for relevant studies. Total 20 studies, including 1576 cases and 1741 controls, were retrieved. The results showed statistically significant positive association between risk factor ε4 allele carriers and AD in Chinese population (OR = 3.93, 95% CI = 3.37-4.58, P < 0.00001). Genotype ApoE ε4/ε4 and ε4/ε3 have statistically significant association with AD as well (ε4/ε4: OR = 11.76, 95% CI = 6.38-21.47, P < 0.00001; ε4/ε3: OR = 3.08, 95% CI = 2.57-3.69, P < 0.00001). Furthermore, the frequency of the ApoE ε3 is lower in AD than that in the health controls, and the difference of ε3 allele is also statistically significant (OR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.37-0.47, P < 0.00001). No significant heterogeneity was observed among all studies. This meta-analysis suggests that the subject with at least one ApoE ε4 allele has higher risk suffering from AD than controls in Chinese population. The results also provide a support for the protection effect of ApoE ε3 allele in developing AD.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24632849 PMCID: PMC3955907 DOI: 10.1038/srep04383
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flow chart of literature screening.
Main characteristics of the eligible studies
| Total no. of | Mean-age | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First author-published year | Geographical location | cases | controls | diagnostic criteria | Cases | Controls |
| Zhu-2000 | Shandong | 36 | 36 | NINCDS-ADRDA | - | - |
| Huang-2001 | Guangzhou | 41 | 85 | DSM-III-R | 80.8 | 59.6 |
| Jia-2002 | Beijing | 58 | 60 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 68.6 ± 7.6 | 65.9 ± 8.5 |
| Huang H-2002 | Taiwan | 99 | 96 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 76.3 ± 6.9 | 72.2 ± 6.9 |
| Bi-2002 | Haerbin | 42 | 40 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 70.4 ± 6.6 | 68.1 ± 4.3 |
| Zhou-2003 | Wulumuqi | 51 | 52 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 74.1 ± 9.7 | 69.4 ± 11.4 |
| Chen-2003 | Beijing/Shanxi | 160 | 195 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 69.4 ± 9.5 | 69.8 ± 7.8 |
| Zhang-2004 | Shandong | 32 | 40 | CCMD-2-R | 74.1 ± 7.3 | 63.9 ± 7.3 |
| He-2005 | Beijing | 27 | 67 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 82.9 ± 7.9 | - |
| Wang-2006 | Taiwan | 151 | 161 | DSM-IV | 74.8 ± 7.9 | 62.5 ± 8.7 |
| Li-2006 | Guizhou | 30 | 30 | DSM-IV | 70.2 ± 11.6 | 71.4 ± 10.5 |
| Yang J-2008 | Yunnan | 58 | 96 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 74.0 ± 8.48 | 74.2 ± 4.72 |
| Yang L-2008 | Henan | 102 | 98 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 78.5 ± 7.3 | 76.5 ± 9.3 |
| Wu-2009 | Shanghai | 262 | 118 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 76.91 ± 5.10 | 60.72 ± 4.88 |
| Duan-2009 | Henan | 32 | 76 | DSM-IV-R | 70.6 ± 9.8 | 63.5 ± 6.7 |
| Mai-2010 | Guangdong | 88 | 97 | DSM-IV-R | 79.6 ± 9.2 | 79.7 ± 8.6 |
| Jiang-2010 | Guangxi | 79 | 156 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 72.8 ± 9. 5 | 71.2 ± 9. 3 |
| Zhou C-2012 | Chongqing | 68 | 72 | DSM-IV-TR | 70.6 ± 6. 8 | 71.2 ± 6. 6 |
| Lv-2012 | Shanghai | 100 | 106 | NINCDS-ADRDA | 77.0 ± 4. 8 | 79.5 ± 5. 0 |
| Dong-2013 | Liaoning | 60 | 60 | NINCDS-ADRDA | - | - |
Distribution of genotypes in the individual studies
| First author | cases | controls | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ε4/ε4 | ε3/ε3 | ε2/ε2 | ε4/ε3 | ε3/ε2 | ε4/ε2 | ε4/ε4 | ε3/ε3 | ε2/ε2 | ε4/ε3 | ε3/ε2 | ε4/ε2 | ||
| Zhu | 2000 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Huang | 2001 | 4 | 20 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 62 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 4 |
| Jia | 2002 | 1 | 29 | 0 | 15 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 47 | 0 | 4 | 8 | 0 |
| Huang | 2002 | 6 | 53 | 5 | 23 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 66 | 3 | 15 | 12 | 0 |
| Bi | 2002 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 28 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
| Zhou | 2003 | 1 | 26 | 3 | 19 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 0 |
| Chen | 2003 | 10 | 85 | 0 | 47 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 137 | 0 | 26 | 29 | 3 |
| Zhang | 2004 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 32 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 1 |
| He | 2005 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 |
| Wang | 2006 | 13 | 75 | 0 | 54 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 120 | 1 | 27 | 11 | 2 |
| Li | 2006 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Yang L | 2008 | 10 | 44 | 1 | 35 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 82 | 0 | 8 | 6 | 1 |
| Yang J | 2008 | 1 | 40 | 0 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 2 |
| Wu | 2009 | 30 | 118 | 0 | 102 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 77 | 2 | 23 | 13 | 2 |
| Duan | 2009 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 12 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 53 | 1 | 9 | 10 | 2 |
| Mai | 2010 | 6 | 45 | 2 | 18 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 65 | 0 | 12 | 16 | 4 |
| Jiang | 2010 | 2 | 47 | 0 | 20 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 107 | 0 | 17 | 31 | 1 |
| Zhou C | 2012 | 5 | 37 | 0 | 17 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 49 | 0 | 9 | 11 | 3 |
| Lv | 2012 | 11 | 44 | 2 | 33 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 2 | 15 | 12 | 1 |
| Dong | 2013 | 4 | 27 | 0 | 23 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 44 | 0 | 9 | 6 | 0 |
Meta-analysis of Apolipoprotein E gene polymorphism in Alzheimer's disease
| Fix-effect model | Random-effect model | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P | Ph | I2 | OR (95% CI) | P | Ph | I2 | |
| ApoE ε2 | 0.88 (0.73, 1.07) | 0.20 | 0.0002 | 61% | 0.93 (0.66, 1.29) | 0.65 | 0.0002 | 61% |
| ApoE ε3 | 0.42 (0.37, 0.47) | <0.00001 | 0.07 | 34% | 0.42 (0.36, 0.49) | <0.00001 | 0.07 | 34% |
| ApoE ε4 | 3.93 (3.37, 4.58) | <0.00001 | 0.81 | 0% | 3.89 (3.33, 4.54) | <0.00001 | 0.81 | 0% |
| ApoE ε4/ε4 | 11.71 (6.38, 21.47) | <0.00001 | 0.98 | 0% | 9.84 (5.28, 18.34) | <0.00001 | 0.98 | 0% |
| ApoE ε3/ε3 | 0.39 (0.33, 0.45) | <0.00001 | 0.25 | 16% | 0.38 (0.33, 0.45) | <0.00001 | 0.25 | 16% |
| ApoE ε2/ε2 | 1.06 (0.55, 2.06) | 0.86 | 0.60 | 0% | 1.09 (0.52, 2.27) | 0.83 | 0.60 | 0% |
| ApoE ε4/ε3 | 3.08 (2.57, 3.69) | <0.00001 | 0.06 | 35% | 3.16 (2.48, 4.02) | <0.00001 | 0.06 | 35% |
| ApoE ε3/ε2 | 0.67 (0.53, 0.85) | 0.0008 | 0.18 | 23% | 0.66 (0.49, 0.88) | 0.005 | 0.18 | 23% |
| ApoE ε4/ε2 | 2.10 (1.35, 3.26) | 0.001 | 0.32 | 11% | 1.92 (1.13, 3.28) | 0.02 | 0.32 | 11% |
Ph, Pheterogeneity.
Figure 2Forest plot on the association between ε4 allele carriers and AD in Chinese population.
Figure 3Forest plot on the association between ε4/ε4 genotype and AD in Chinese population.
Figure 4Funnel plot on the association between ε4 allele carriers and AD.
Figure 5Funnel plot on the association between ε4/ε4 genotype and AD.