| Literature DB >> 28388903 |
Haiguang Zhang1, Junbo Ge1, Huanyu Hong1, Lili Bi2, Zhengwen Sun3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There existed controversies about the association between the response to chemotherapy for osteosarcoma (OS) patients and the genetic polymorphisms in excision repair cross-complementation group (ERCC1 and ERCC2) genes. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the association.Entities:
Keywords: Chemotherapy response; ERCC1; ERCC2; Meta-analysis; Polymorphism
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28388903 PMCID: PMC5383995 DOI: 10.1186/s12957-017-1142-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg Oncol ISSN: 1477-7819 Impact factor: 2.754
Fig. 1Flow diagram displaying study selection and specific reasons for exclusion from the mete-analysis
Summary of characteristics of studies in the meta-analysis
| Study | Number of patients | Treatment approaches | Genotyping methods | Age | Male (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Z.H. Cao (2015) | 186 | Cisplatin-based chemotherapy | PCR-RFLP | 19.2 ± 9.4 | 57.53 |
| Z.F. Liu (2015) | 115 | Cisplatin-based chemotherapy | MALDI-TOF MS | – | 56.52 |
| Y.J. Sun (2015) | 175 | Chemotherapy | PCR-RFLP | 17.8 ± 9.7 | 66.28 |
| W.P. Ji (2015) | 214 | Cisplatin-based chemotherapy | PCR-RFLP | 18.7 ± 11.5 | 62.15 |
| Q. Zhang (2015) | 260 | Cisplatin-based chemotherapy | PCR-RFLP | 18.4 ± 8.5 | 43.84 |
| L.M. Yang(2012) | 187 | Neoadjuvant chemotherapy | PCR-RFLP | 17.7 ± 9.6 | 56.68 |
PCR-RFLP polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism assay, MALDI-TOF MS matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry method, – unavailable
Meta-analysis of the association of the response to chemotherapy for OS patients and the rs11615, rs1799793, and rs13181 polymorphisms
| SNP | Total patients ( | Model | OR | Lower limit | Upper limit |
|
|
|
|
| FSN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs11615 | 1019 | Dominant model (TT + TC/CC) | 2.015 | 1.242 | 3.271 | 0.005 | 53.30 | 0.073 | 0.462 | 0.168 | 25.000 |
| Recessive model(TT/TC + CC) | 1.791 | 1.353 | 2.372 | 0.003 | 36.60 | 0.177 | 0.462 | 0.508 | 22.393 | ||
| Allelic model(T/C) | 1.677 | 1.194 | 2.356 | 0.003 | 67.30 | 0.016 | 0.806 | 0.927 | 105.107 | ||
| rs13181 | 1133 | Dominant model (AA + AC/CC) | 1.058 | 0.739 | 1.516 | 0.757 | <0.01 | 0.572 | 0.707 | 0.511 | 3.434 |
| Recessive model(AA/AC + CC) | 1.135 | 0.868 | 1.484 | 0.355 | 16.10 | 0.31 | 0.26 | 0.079 | 3.160 | ||
| Allelic model(A/C) | 1.091 | 0.894 | 1.331 | 0.392 | 37.40 | 0.157 | 0.452 | 0.271 | 14.151 | ||
| rs1799793 | 949 | Dominant model (GG + GA/AA) | 1.54 | 0.982 | 2.413 | 0.06 | 22.30 | 0.272 | 0.221 | 0.317 | 44.628 |
| Recessive model(GG/AG + AA) | 1.337 | 1.019 | 1.754 | 0.036 | 36.70 | 0.177 | 1.000 | 0.98 | 56.223 | ||
| Allelic model(G/A) | 1.328 | 0.943 | 1.87 | 0.105 | 57.60 | 0.051 | 1.000 | 0.973 | 92.857 |
n number of participants, FSN fail-safe numbers
Fig. 2Forest plot of study evaluating the relationship between the response to chemotherapy for OS patients and the ERCC1 rs11615 polymorphism
Fig. 3Forest plot of study assessing the relationship between the response to chemotherapy for OS patients and the ERCC2 rs13181 polymorphism
Fig. 4Forest plot of study estimating the relationship between the response to chemotherapy for OS patients and the ERCC2 rs1799793 polymorphism
Fig. 5Funnel plots of studies with ERCC1 rs11615 polymorphism under dominant model (a), recessive model (b), and allelic model (c)
Fig. 6Funnel plots of studies with ERCC2 rs13181 polymorphism under dominant model (a), recessive model (b), and allelic model (c)
Fig. 7Funnel plots of studies with ERCC2 rs1799793 polymorphism under dominant model (a), recessive model (b), and allelic model (c)