Bin Kong1, Zhi-Dong Lv1, Li Chen2, Ruo-Wu Shen3, Li-Ying Jin4, Zhao-Chuan Yang5. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University Qingdao 266003, P. R. China. 2. Institute of Basic Sciences, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences Jinan 250000, P. R. China. 3. Department of Anatomy, Medical College, Qingdao University Qingdao 266003, P. R. China. 4. Institute of Cerebrovascular Disease Research, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University Qingdao 266003, P. R. China. 5. Department of Child Health Care, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University Qingdao 266003, P. R. China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Several studies have investigated the associations between XRCC2 R188H polymorphism and the susceptibility to breast cancer, but the results have been inconclusive. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. METHODS: PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) searches were carried out for relevant studies published before March 2015. Meta-analysis was performed with the Stata, version 11.0. RESULTS: A total of 17 case-control studies, including 17,986 cases and 17,436 controls, were selected. Crude odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the strength of association in the homozygous model, dominant model, and recessive model. When all the studies were pooled into the meta-analysis, there was no evidence showing a significant association between XRCC2 R188H polymorphism and breast cancer risk (for homozygous model, OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.62-1.14; for dominant model: OR=0.76, 95% CI=0.53-1.09; and for recessive model: OR=1.04, 95% CI=0.98-1.10). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, no significant association was found between the polymorphism and breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicates that the XRCC2 R188H polymorphism is not a risk factor for developing of breast cancer.
PURPOSE: Several studies have investigated the associations between XRCC2R188H polymorphism and the susceptibility to breast cancer, but the results have been inconclusive. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. METHODS: PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) searches were carried out for relevant studies published before March 2015. Meta-analysis was performed with the Stata, version 11.0. RESULTS: A total of 17 case-control studies, including 17,986 cases and 17,436 controls, were selected. Crude odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the strength of association in the homozygous model, dominant model, and recessive model. When all the studies were pooled into the meta-analysis, there was no evidence showing a significant association between XRCC2R188H polymorphism and breast cancer risk (for homozygous model, OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.62-1.14; for dominant model: OR=0.76, 95% CI=0.53-1.09; and for recessive model: OR=1.04, 95% CI=0.98-1.10). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, no significant association was found between the polymorphism and breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicates that the XRCC2R188H polymorphism is not a risk factor for developing of breast cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
XRCC2; breast cancer; meta-analysis; polymorphism; susceptibility
Authors: Jennifer Brooks; Roy E Shore; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Diane Currie; Yelena Afanasyeva; Karen L Koenig; Alan A Arslan; Paolo Toniolo; Isaac Wirgin Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Alexandra S Shadrina; Natalia A Ermolenko; Uljana A Boyarskikh; Tatiana V Sinkina; Alexandr F Lazarev; Valentina D Petrova; Maxim L Filipenko Journal: Clin Exp Med Date: 2014-12-24 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Penelope M Webb; John L Hopper; Beth Newman; Xiaoqing Chen; Livia Kelemen; Graham G Giles; Melissa C Southey; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Amanda B Spurdle Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Saeed Rafii; Paul O'Regan; George Xinarianos; Iman Azmy; Tim Stephenson; Malcolm Reed; Mark Meuth; John Thacker; Angela Cox Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2002-06-01 Impact factor: 6.150