| Literature DB >> 24651702 |
Chun-mei Liang1, Dong-mei Ji2, Xu Yuan3, Ling-ling Ren1, Juan Shen1, Hai-yan Zhang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many publications have evaluated the correlation between RET, PHOX2B polymorphisms and Hirschsprung's disease with conflicting results. We performed this meta-analysis to clarify the association of RET, PHOX2B polymorphisms with HSCR.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24651702 PMCID: PMC3961244 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Process of selecting studies about RET and PHOX2B gene.
Characteristics of studies included in this meta-analysis about RET gene.
| First author | Year | Population | Race | Cases/controls | Geme polymorphism | Genotype method | Type of study | HWE |
| Phusantisampan | 2012 | Thai | Asia | 68/120 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR–RFLP | Hospital-based | 0.12 |
| rs1800861(T>G) | TaqMan | 0.77 | ||||||
| rs2435357(T>C) | TaqMan | 0.40 | ||||||
| Liu | 2010 | Chinese | Asia | 125/148 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.79 |
| rs1800860(A>G) | 0.86 | |||||||
| Tou | 2011 | Chinese | Asia | 123/168 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.72 |
| rs1800860(A>G) | 0.81 | |||||||
| rs1800861(T>G) | 0.09 | |||||||
| rs10900297(A>C) | 0.77 | |||||||
| Miao | 2010 | Chinese | Asia | 315/352 | rs10900297(A>C) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.99 |
| rs2435357(T>C) | Hospital-based | 0.39 | ||||||
| Fitze | 2003 | German | Europe | 80/120 | rs1800858(G>A) | NA | Hospital-based | 0.90 |
| rs10900297(A>C) | 0.97 | |||||||
| Burzynski | 2004 | Netherlander | Europe | 105/126 | rs1800858(G>A) | NA | Hospital-based | 0.24 |
| Sadewa | 2008 | Indonesians | Asia | 34/46 | rs1800861(T>G) | PCR-RFLP | Hospital-based | 0.06 |
| Garcia-Barcelo | 2005 | Chinese | Asia | 172/194 | rs1800858(G>A) | 0.54 | ||
| rs1800861(T>G) | 0.08 | |||||||
| rs10900297(A>C) | 0.36 | |||||||
| Li | 2011 | Chinese | Asia | 80/80 | rs1800860(A>G) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.29 |
| rs18008611(T>G) | 0.12 | |||||||
| Du | 2006 | Chinese | Asia | 94/122 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR | Hospital-based | <0.01 |
| rs1800861(T>G) | <0.01 | |||||||
| Zhang | 2005 | Chinese | Asia | 16/40 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR | Hospital-based | <0.05 |
| Zhao | 2012 | Chinese | Asia | 80/80 | rs1800858(G>A) | PCR-HRM | Hospital-based | <0.01 |
| Wang | 2006 | Chinese | Asia | 52/120 | rs10900297(A>C) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.41 |
| Arnold | 2008 | Caucasian | Europe | 62/30 | rs2435357(T>C) | TaqMan | Hospital-based | 0.66 |
| Pini Prato | 2009 | Italian | Europe | 22/85 | rs2435357(T>C) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.44 |
| Zhang | 2007 | Chinese | Asia | 99/132 | rs2435357(T>C) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.54 |
Characteristics of studies included in this meta-analysis about PHOX2B gene.
| First author | Year | Population | Race | Cases/controls | Geme polymorphism | Genotype method | Type of study | HWE |
| Garcia-Barcelo | 2003 | Chinese | Asia | 91/71 | rs28647582(A>G) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.07 |
| Liu | 2009 | Chinese | Asia | 100/96 | rs28647582(A>G) | PCR | Hospital-based | <0.05 |
| Dou | 2007 | Chinese | Asia | 123/194 | rs28647582(A>G) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.09 |
| Xiao | 2009 | Chinese | Asia | 58/150 | rs28647582(A>G) | PCR | Hospital-based | 0.54 |
Main results of the meta-analysis.
| Gene polymorphism | Number of studies | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | Publication bias | |||||
| Comparison | OR | 95%CI |
| Q |
| I2(%) |
| ||
| rs28647582 | 4 | GG vs AA | 2.05 | 0.94–4.48 | 0.07 | 3.63 | 0.305 | 17.3 | 0.497 |
| 4 | GG vs GA+AA | 2.14 | 0.98–4.69 | 0.06 | 3.12 | 0.373 | 4.0 | 1.000 | |
| 4 | GG+GA vs AA | 0.76 | 0.40–1.45 | 0.41 | 12.69 | 0.005 | 76.4 | 0.174 | |
| 4 | G vs A | 0.86 | 0.46–1.60 | 0.64 | 14.90 | 0.002 | 79.9 | 0.174 | |
| rs1800858 | 9 | AA vs GG | 8.36 | 3.45–20.25 | 0.000 | 68.06 | 0.000 | 88.2 | 0.835 |
| 9 | AA+GA vs GG | 3.59 | 1.83–7.02 | 0.000 | 55.29 | 0.000 | 85.5 | 0.835 | |
| 9 | AA vs GA+GG | 6.60 | 3.66–11.89 | 0.000 | 53.05 | 0.000 | 84.9 | 0.835 | |
| 9 | A vs G | 3.81 | 2.28–6.35 | 0.000 | 99.13 | 0.000 | 91.9 | 1.000 | |
| rs1800860 | 2 | GG vs AA | 4.56 | 1.14–18.27 | 0.032 | 0.89 | 0.347 | 0.0 | 0.317 |
| 3 | GG vs GA+AA | 2.38 | 1.66–3.43 | 0.000 | 0.64 | 0.728 | 0.0 | 0.602 | |
| 2 | GG+GA vs AA | 3.77 | 0.94–15.07 | 0.061 | 0.87 | 0.351 | 0.0 | 0.317 | |
| 3 | G vs A | 2.23 | 1.60–3.11 | 0.000 | 0.80 | 0.669 | 0.0 | 0.117 | |
| rs1800861 | 6 | GG vs TT | 5.38 | 2.68–10.80 | 0.000 | 16.29 | 0.006 | 69.3 | 0.851 |
| 6 | GG+TG vs TT | 3.07 | 2.17–4.34 | 0.000 | 5.23 | 0.388 | 4.5 | 0.348 | |
| 6 | GG vs TT+TG | 4.14 | 1.84–9.30 | 0.001 | 50.09 | 0.000 | 90.0 | 0.348 | |
| 6 | G vs T | 2.85 | 1.81–4.47 | 0.000 | 30.02 | 0.000 | 83.3 | 0.188 | |
| rs10900297 | 5 | CC vs AA | 9.73 | 5.94–15.94 | 0.000 | 1.45 | 0.835 | 0.0 | 1.000 |
| 5 | CC+AC vs AA | 5.31 | 3.27–8.62 | 0.000 | 1.43 | 0.839 | 0.0 | 0.624 | |
| 5 | CC vs AC+AA | 7.06 | 5.60–8.91 | 0.000 | 4.84 | 0.304 | 17.3 | 1.000 | |
| 5 | C vs A | 5.05 | 4.16–6.13 | 0.000 | 4.02 | 0.403 | 0.5 | 0.624 | |
| rs2435357 | 5 | TT vs CC | 11.44 | 5.67–23.10 | 0.000 | 10.06 | 0.039 | 60.3 | 0.327 |
| 5 | TT+TC vs CC | 4.04 | 2.92–5.57 | 0.000 | 4.39 | 0.355 | 9.0 | 0.624 | |
| 5 | TT vs TC+CC | 9.01 | 5.25–15.46 | 0.000 | 10.30 | 0.036 | 61.2 | 0.327 | |
| 5 | T vs C | 4.53 | 3.27–6.27 | 0.000 | 9.73 | 0.045 | 58.9 | 1.000 | |
The results of subgroup analyses.
| Gene polymorphism | Comparison | OR (95%CI) | |
| Asia | Europe | ||
| rs1800858 | AA vs GG | 5.92 (2.14–16.34) | 26.71 (13.92–51.24) |
| AA vs AG+GG | 5.28 (2.66–10.46) | 14.78 (8.34–26.16) | |
| AA+AG vs GG | 2.89 (1.29–6.48) | 7.04 (4.41–11.24) | |
| A vs G | 3.25 (1.75–6.04) | 6.52 (4.83–8.81) | |