Jing Xia1, Weiping Cai2, Caosheng Peng1. 1. Department for VIP Patients, The Navy General Hospital of PLA Haidian District, Beijing 100048, China. 2. Department of Heart Center, The Navy General Hospital of PLA Haidian District, Beijing 100048, China.
Abstract
AIMS: Our research aimed to investigate the relationship between Apolipoprotein A5 (APOA5) T1131C polymorphism and the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: We searched the relevant articles in databases and 25 ones were chosen. The association between APOA5 T1131C polymorphism and CAD risk was evaluated using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The fixed-effect model or random-effect model was applied according to the heterogeneity analysis. RESULTS: Overall, significant association between CAD risk and APOA5 T1131C polymorphism was found (CC vs. TT: OR=1.47, 95% CI=1.22-1.78; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.07-1.20; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.37, 95% CI=1.13-1.66; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.17, 95% CI=1.09-1.25; TC vs. TT: OR=1.12, 95% CI=1.06-1.20). In the ethnicity subgroup analysis, risk of CAD was observed in all genotypes among Asians (CC vs. TT: OR=1.40, 95% CI=1.17-1.68; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.06-1.20; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.30, 95% CI=1.08-1.56; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.15, 95% CI=1.08-1.24; TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.06-1.21), While in Caucasians, the similar association was only found in several genotypes. In the subgroup analysis by source of control, we found that APOA5 T1131C polymorphism could increase the risk of CAD in population-based (PB) genetic group (CC vs. TT: OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.29-1.84; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.15, 95% CI=1.08-1.23; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.45, 95% CI=1.19-1.76; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.12-1.25; TC vs. TT: OR=1.14, 95% CI=1.06-1.22). There was no correlation found in hospital-based (HB) genetic group yet. CONCLUSION: APOA5 T1131C polymorphism might be significantly associated with susceptibility to CAD.
AIMS: Our research aimed to investigate the relationship between Apolipoprotein A5 (APOA5) T1131C polymorphism and the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: We searched the relevant articles in databases and 25 ones were chosen. The association between APOA5T1131C polymorphism and CAD risk was evaluated using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The fixed-effect model or random-effect model was applied according to the heterogeneity analysis. RESULTS: Overall, significant association between CAD risk and APOA5T1131C polymorphism was found (CC vs. TT: OR=1.47, 95% CI=1.22-1.78; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.07-1.20; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.37, 95% CI=1.13-1.66; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.17, 95% CI=1.09-1.25; TC vs. TT: OR=1.12, 95% CI=1.06-1.20). In the ethnicity subgroup analysis, risk of CAD was observed in all genotypes among Asians (CC vs. TT: OR=1.40, 95% CI=1.17-1.68; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.06-1.20; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.30, 95% CI=1.08-1.56; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.15, 95% CI=1.08-1.24; TC vs. TT: OR=1.13, 95% CI=1.06-1.21), While in Caucasians, the similar association was only found in several genotypes. In the subgroup analysis by source of control, we found that APOA5T1131C polymorphism could increase the risk of CAD in population-based (PB) genetic group (CC vs. TT: OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.29-1.84; CC+TC vs. TT: OR=1.15, 95% CI=1.08-1.23; CC vs. TT+TC: OR=1.45, 95% CI=1.19-1.76; allele C vs. allele T: OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.12-1.25; TC vs. TT: OR=1.14, 95% CI=1.06-1.22). There was no correlation found in hospital-based (HB) genetic group yet. CONCLUSION:APOA5T1131C polymorphism might be significantly associated with susceptibility to CAD.
Authors: Csaba Szalai; Márton Keszei; Jenõ Duba; Zoltán Prohászka; Gergely Tibor Kozma; Albert Császár; Sándor Balogh; Zsuzsa Almássy; George Fust; Antal Czinner Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Yangsoo Jang; Jean Kyung Paik; Yae Jung Hyun; Jey Sook Chae; Ji Young Kim; Ju Ree Choi; Sang Hak Lee; Dong-Jik Shin; Jose M Ordovas; Jong Ho Lee Journal: Clin Chim Acta Date: 2008-12-31 Impact factor: 3.786
Authors: I-Min Lee; Eric J Shiroma; Felipe Lobelo; Pekka Puska; Steven N Blair; Peter T Katzmarzyk Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-07-21 Impact factor: 79.321