| Literature DB >> 25121088 |
Pengfei Du1, Xiaojie Ma1, Changjiang Wang2.
Abstract
Many studies have established that T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA4) is a susceptible gene for Graves' disease (GD). Also many studies showed the association between the CTLA4 exon-1 49A/G polymorphism and the risk of developing Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO) in GD patients. But those results were inconsistent. In recent years many new studies were published which helped to shed light on the relationship of CTLA4 SNP49 with GO. So we performed the meta-analysis to explore the association between the SNP49 and GO susceptibility in GD patients. Studies up to February 29, 2012, were searched by using PubMed. The odds ratio was used to evaluate the strength of the association. Altogether 12 case-control studies involving 2,505 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Results showed that the G allele was related to the increased risk of GO compared with the A allele under allelic genetic model (OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.14-1.72, P = 0.001) in European subgroup. No publication bias was detected. Our results showed that the SNP49 polymorphism of CTLA4 gene was related to increased risk of GO.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25121088 PMCID: PMC4121157 DOI: 10.1155/2014/537969
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Genomics ISSN: 2314-436X Impact factor: 2.326
General characteristics of the selected studies in the meta-analysis.
| Ethnic | Country | SNP genotyping | Grouping method | Eligible subjects | First author (year) [reference] | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GO | Non-GO | GO | Non-GO | ||||
| European | USA | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | No clinical feature | 85 | 52 |
Villanueva (2000) [ |
| UK | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 161 | 323 | Allahabadia (2001) [ | |
| Slovenia | RFLP | Clinical features | No clinical feature | 33 | 34 | Zaletel (2002) [ | |
| Iran | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 105 | 100 | Esteghamati (2009) [ | |
| Poland | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | No clinical feature | 95 | 169 | Bednarczuk (2003) [ | |
| UK | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 124 | 168 | Vaidya (2003) [ | |
| Poland | Minisequencing | NOSPEC3–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 50 | 49 | Frydecka (2004) [ | |
| Italy | RFLP | NOSPEC2–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 90 | 60 | Petrone (2005) [ | |
|
| |||||||
| Asian | China | DCFH | NOSPEC3–6 | NOSPEC < 3 | 142 | 119 | Han (2006) [ |
| China | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | No clinical feature | 33 | 56 | Zhang (2006) [ | |
| China | RFLP | NOSPEC2 | NOSPEC3, 4 | 34 | 22 | Chong (2008) [ | |
| Japan | RFLP | NOSPEC3–6 | No clinical feature | 99 | 220 | Bednarczuk (2003) [ | |
| Korea | RFLP | Clinical feature | No clinical feature | 26 | 47 | Park (2000) [ | |
Distribution of CTLA4 49A/G alleles among GO and controls in the included studies.
| First author | Country | A/A ( | A/G ( | G/G ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GO | Non-GO | GO | Non-GO | GO | Non-GO | ||
| Villanueva (2000) [ | USA | 26 | 16 | 42 | 25 | 17 | 11 |
| Allahabadia (2001) [ | UK | 53 | 83 | 82 | 180 | 26 | 60 |
| Zaletel (2002) [ | Slovenia | 11 | 14 | 17 | 17 | 5 | 3 |
| Esteghamati (2009) [ | Iran | 48 | 66 | 43 | 28 | 14 | 6 |
| Bednarczuk (2003) [ | Poland | 27 | 48 | 41 | 82 | 27 | 39 |
| Vaidya (2003) [ | UK | 27 | 61 | 62 | 77 | 40 | 34 |
| Frydecka (2004) [ | Poland | 11 | 21 | 29 | 21 | 10 | 7 |
| Petrone (2005) [ | Italy | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Han (2006) [ | China | 18 | 14 | 55 | 39 | 69 | 66 |
| Zhang (2006) [ | China | 1 | 1 | 11 | 18 | 21 | 37 |
| Chong (2008) [ | China | 1 | 0 | 9 | 8 | 24 | 14 |
| Bednarczuk (2003) [ | Japan | 12 | 16 | 41 | 99 | 46 | 105 |
| Park (2000) [ | Korea | 1 | 3 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 29 |
NA: not available.
Figure 1Meta-analysis for the effect of the G allele versus the A allele on the risk of GO in GD patients. Each comparison is presented by the name of the first author and the year of publication. The point estimate of the odds ratio and the accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI) are shown. “Total” represents the summary random effects estimation for the comparison along with the respective 95% confidence interval. Values above 1 denote an increased risk for GO with the G allele.
Figure 2Meta-analysis for the effect of the GG versus the AA genotype on the risk of GO in GD patients in European subgroup. Each comparison is presented by the name of the first author and the year of publication. The point estimate of the odds ratio and the accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI) are shown. “Total” represents the summary random effects estimation for the comparison along with the respective 95% confidence interval. Values above 1 denote an increased risk for GO with the GG genotype.
Figure 3Meta-analysis for the effect of the CTLA4 49A/G allele in G carriers and in A carriers on the risk of GO in GD patients. Each comparison is presented by the name of the first author and the year of publication. The point estimate of the odds ratio and the accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI) are shown. “Total” represents the summary random effects estimation for the comparison along with the respective 95% confidence interval. Values above 1 denote an increased risk for GO with the G allele.