| Literature DB >> 27583352 |
Cao Wenjuan1, Lu Jianzhong1, Li Chong1, Gao Yanjun1, Lu Keqing1, Wang Hanzhang2, Wang Zhiping1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the susceptibility of the hOGG1 genetic polymorphism for bladder cancer and evaluate the impact of smoking exposure.Entities:
Keywords: Meta-Analysis as Topic; Polymorphism, Genetic; oxoguanine glycosylase 1, human [Supplementary Concept]
Year: 2016 PMID: 27583352 PMCID: PMC5066884 DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0446
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Braz J Urol ISSN: 1677-5538 Impact factor: 1.541
Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis.
| First author [reference] | Country/Region | Ethnicity | Genotyping method | Cases (age) | Controls (age) | Design of Experiment | NOS score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim (2005) ( | Korea | Asian | PCR-RFLP | N=153 (62.9±11.8 years) | N=153 (60.7±11.8 years) | Hospital-based | 6 |
| Karahalil (2006) ( | Turkey | Caucasian | PCR-RFLP | N=100 (mean age 59.87 years) | N=100 (mean age 59.33 years) | Hospital-based | 6 |
| Huang (2007) ( | USA | Caucasian | Taqman | N=696 (63.94±11.17 years) | N=629 (62.77±10.50 years) | Hospital-based | 7 |
| Figueroa (2007) ( | Spain | Caucasian | Taqman | N=1150 (66±10 years) | N=1149 (65±10 years) | Hospital-based | 6 |
| Arizono (2008) ( | Japan | Asian | PCR-RFLP | N=251 (68.2±11.2 years) | N=251 (68.1±11.7 years) | Population-based | 6 |
| Narter (2009) ( | Turkey | Caucasian | PCR-RFLP | N=83 (63.43±11.74 years) | N=45 (59.98±9.71 years) | Hospital-based | 7 |
| Wang (2011) ( | Taiwan | Asian | PCR-RFLP | N=460 (62.7±10.9 years) | N=540 (61.9±11.0 years) | Hospital-based | 7 |
| Mittal (2011) ( | India | Asian | ARMS-PCR | N=212 (59.6±12.4 years) | N=250 (58.8±10.8 years) | Hospital-based | 6 |
| Ma (2012) ( | China | Asian | TaqMan | N=1050 (65±5 years) | N=1404 (65±5 years) | Hospital-based | 6 |
| Ramaniuk (2014) ( | Belarus | Caucasian | PCR-RFLP | N=336 (67.0±10.7 years) | N=370 (64.5±13.5 years) | Hospital-based | 8 |
Genotype, allele frequencies and HWE of the studies.
| First author | Genotype | Allele | HWE(p) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases n (%) | Control n (%) | Cases n (%) | Controls n (%) | ||||||||
| Ser/Ser | Ser/Cys | Cys/Cys | Ser/Ser | Ser/Cys | Cys/Cys | Ser | Cys | Ser | Cys | ||
| Kim (2005) | 37 | 90 | 26 | 38 | 70 | 45 | 164 | 142 | 146 | 160 | 0.30 |
| Karahalil (2006) | 40 | 47 | 12 | 62 | 20 | 18 | 127 | 71 | 144 | 56 | <0.001 |
| Huang (2007) | 375 | 209 | 29 | 348 | 216 | 36 | 959 | 267 | 912 | 288 | 0.75 |
| Figueroa (2007) | 649 | 383 | 56 | 596 | 361 | 61 | 1681 | 495 | 1553 | 483 | 0.52 |
| Arizono (2008) | 61 | 107 | 83 | 67 | 135 | 49 | 229 | 273 | 269 | 233 | 0.20 |
| Narter (2009) | 37 | 13 | 8 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 87 | 29 | 54 | 18 | 0.08 |
| Mittal (2011) | 92 | 93 | 27 | 122 | 111 | 17 | 277 | 147 | 355 | 145 | 0.21 |
| Wang (2011) | 55 | 227 | 178 | 82 | 246 | 212 | 337 | 583 | 410 | 670 | 0.45 |
| Ma (2012) | 155 | 551 | 344 | 212 | 676 | 514 | 861 | 1239 | 1100 | 1704 | 0.67 |
| Ramaniuk (2014) | 223 | 94 | 18 | 221 | 132 | 13 | 540 | 130 | 574 | 158 | 0.21 |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genotype frequency and distribution according to smoking status.
| Author | Genotype | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Control | ||||||
| Ser/Ser | Ser/Cys | Cys/Cys | Ser/Ser | Ser/Cys | Cys/Cys | ||
| Smoke | |||||||
| Karahalil (2006) | 14 | 16 | 4 | 27 | 9 | 7 | |
| Arizono (2008) | 42 | 72 | 51 | 42 | 83 | 33 | |
| Ma (2012) | 344 | 153 | 341 | 195 | |||
| Ramaniuk (2014) | 155 | 62 | 14 | 60 | 44 | 6 | |
| Non-smoke | |||||||
| Karahalil (2006) | 7 | 4 | 2 | 38 | 9 | 10 | |
| Arizono (2008) | 19 | 35 | 32 | 25 | 52 | 16 | |
| Ma (2012) | 362 | 191 | 547 | 319 | |||
| Ramaniuk (2014) | 61 | 31 | 4 | 142 | 80 | 6 | |
Figure 1Flow chart of the study selection process.
Figure 2Overall meta-analysis and subgroup analysis by ethnicity for GG genotype versus CC genotype.
Figure 6Overall meta-analysis and subgroup analysis by ethnicity for GG genotype versus (GC+CC) genotype.
Figure 7Overall meta-analysis and subgroup analysis by ethnicity for GG genotype versus CC genotype in the smoker population.
Figure 14Overall meta-analysis and subgroup analysis by ethnicity for GG genotype versus (GC+CC) genotype in the non-smoker population.
Figure 15Begg's funnel plots for publication bias in the meta-analysis.
Figure 16Egger's funnel plots for publication bias in the meta-analysis.