| Literature DB >> 25942469 |
Xianxian Yang1, Bin Tan1, Xipeng Zhou1, Jian Xue1, Xian Zhang1, Peng Wang1, Chuang Shao2, Yingli Li1, Chaorui Li1, Huiming Xia3, Jingfu Qiu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pandemic influenza A (H1N1) pdm09 virus, avian influenza A (H5N1) virus, and influenza A (H7N9) virus induced severe morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Previous studies suggested a close association between the interferon-induced transmembrane protein-3 (IFITM3) genetic variant rs12252 and influenza. Here, we explored the correlation between the rs12252 and influenza susceptibility and severity using meta-analysis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25942469 PMCID: PMC4420464 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124985
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow chart of data selection.
Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis.
| Study | Year | Country | Ethnicity | Type of virus | Case/control | Design | Genotyping methods | Type of control | HWE | Quality grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Everitt et al. | 2013 | UK | Caucasian | H1N1 and seasonal influenza virus | 53/360 | Cohort study | PCR | the 1,000 genomes project | 0.37 | A (scored 16) |
| Mills et al. | 2013 | UK | Caucasian | H1N1 | 293/2623 | Case-control study | PCR | NHC | 1 | A (scored 17) |
| Wang et al. | 2014 | China | Asian | H7N9 | 16/1000 | Cohort study | PCR | the 1,000 genome project | NA | A (scored 15) |
| Zhang et al. | 2013 | China | Asian | H1N1 | 83/197 | Cohort study | PCR | the 1,000 genomes project | NA | A (scored 15) |
H1N1, pandemic influenza A; H7N9, influenza A virus subtype; NHC, normal health controls; HWE, Hardy—Weinberg equilibrium; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; NA, not available.
Genotype and allele distributions of IFITM3-SNP rs12252 in influenza and controls.
| Locus | Study | Case | Control | Case | Control | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC | CT | TT | CC | CT | TT | C | T | C | T | ||
|
| Everitt et al. | 3 | 4 | 46 | 1 | 24 | 335 | 10 | 96 | 26 | 694 |
| Mills et al. | 2 | 25 | 266 | 4 | 202 | 2417 | 29 | 557 | 210 | 5036 | |
| Wang et al. | 6 | 7 | 3 | 26 | 37 | 37 | 19 | 13 | 89 | 111 | |
| Zhang et al. | 35 | 39 | 9 | 50 | 98 | 49 | 109 | 57 | 198 | 196 | |
|
| Everitt et al. | 3 | 4 | 46 | 1 | 24 | 335 | 10 | 96 | 26 | 694 |
| Mills et al. | 0 | 3 | 31 | 4 | 202 | 2417 | 3 | 65 | 210 | 5036 | |
| Wang et al. | 6 | 7 | 3 | 26 | 37 | 37 | 19 | 13 | 89 | 111 | |
| Zhang et al. | 22 | 8 | 2 | 50 | 98 | 49 | 52 | 12 | 198 | 196 | |
|
| Mills et al. | 2 | 22 | 235 | 4 | 202 | 2417 | 26 | 492 | 210 | 5036 |
| Zhang et al. | 13 | 31 | 7 | 50 | 98 | 49 | 57 | 45 | 198 | 196 | |
Meta-analysis of IFITM3-SNP rs12252 and susceptibility of influenza.
| Group | Genetic model | OR(95%CI) |
| Heterogeneity of study design | Effect modle | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Z |
|
| |||||
|
| CC+CT VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CC VS. CT+TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| CT VS. TT | 1.37 [0.98, 1.92] | 0.07 | 1.81 | 0.45 | 0 |
| |
| CC VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| C VS. T |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| CC+CT VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CC VS. CT+TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| CT VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| CC VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| C VS. T |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| CC+CT VS. TT | 1.30 [0.89, 1.90] | 0.17 | 1.36 | 0.29 | 12 | F |
| CC VS. CT+TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| CT VS. TT | 1.14 [0.76, 1.70] | 0.54 | 0.62 | 0.90 | 0 | F | |
| CC VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| C VS. T | 1.74 [0.80, 3.78] | 0.16 | 1.40 | 0.07 | 70 | R | |
|
| CC+CT VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CC VS. CT+TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| CT VS. TT | 1.52 [0.82, 2.82] | 0.19 | 1.32 | 0.84 | 0 | F | |
| CC VS. TT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| C VS. T |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| CC+CT VS. TT | 1.37 [0.94, 2.02] | 0.10 | 1.63 | 0.26 | 21 | F |
| CC VS. CT+TT | 1.87 [0.39, 8.90] | 0.43 | 0.79 | 0.08 | 67 | R | |
| CT VS. TT | 1.32 [0.89, 1.96] | 0.17 | 1.38 | 0.18 | 44 | F | |
| CC VS. TT | 2.18 [0.89, 5.30] | 0.09 | 1.71 | 0.29 | 9 | F | |
| C VS. T | 1.26 [0.93, 1.71] | 0.13 | 1.50 | 0.97 | 0 | F | |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; F, fixed-effect model; R, random-effect model; P het, P value of heterogeneity.
* P<0.05 stands for significance.
Fig 2The forest plot for the association between SNP rs12252 of IFITM3 and influenza susceptibility in the recessive model (CC vs. CT+TT), subgroup analysis by different ethnicity.
Fig 3The forest plot for the association between SNP rs12252 of IFITM3 and influenza susceptibility in the homozygote comparison (CC vs. TT), subgroup analysis by different ethnicity.
Fig 4The forest plot for the association between SNP rs12252 of IFITM3 and influenza susceptibility in the recessive model (CC vs. CT+TT), subgroup analysis by different severity.
The individual block squares denote the susceptibility for each study published during 2014, with an area proportional to the amount of statistical information in each study. The horizontal line denotes a 95% confidence interval (CI). The pooled estimate and its 95% CI are represented by a diamond.
Fig 5The forest plot for the association between SNP rs12252 of IFITM3 and influenza susceptibility in the homozygote comparison (CC vs. TT), subgroup analysis by different severity.
Meta-analysis of IFITM3-SNP rs12252 and severity of influenza (C vs. T).
| Comparison | OR(95%CI) |
| Heterogeneity of study design | Effect modle | Test of publication | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| bias | ||||||||
| Z |
|
| t value |
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| R | 0 | 1 |
| Mild vs Control | 1.26 [0.93, 1.71] | 0.13 | 1.50 | 0.97 | 0 | F | 0 | 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.34 | 0.734 |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; F, fixed-effect model; R, random-effect model; P het, P value of heterogeneity.
* P<0.05 stands for significance.
Fig 6Begg’s funnel plot for publication bias in the recessive model (CC vs. CT+TT) for influenza.