| Literature DB >> 28637509 |
Zheng Hao1, Xin Li2, Jin Dai3,4, Baocheng Zhao5, Qing Jiang6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a complex arthritic condition in which genetic factors play an important role. ADAM12 gene is one of the recognized candidate genes although the results are conflicting. To derive a more precise estimation of the association between rs3740199 polymorphism in ADAM12 gene and risk of knee OA, we performed a meta-analysis based on six related studies, including a total of 2185 cases and 3716 controls.Entities:
Keywords: ADAM12; Meta-analysis; Osteoarthritis; Polymorphism; rs3740199
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28637509 PMCID: PMC5480204 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-017-0594-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1Studies identified with criteria for inclusion and exclusion
Characteristics of literatures included in this meta-analysis
| Year | First author | OA type | Country | Ethnicity | Assessment of OA | Genetyping | Source of controls | Cases | Controls |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | J. Rodriguez-Lopez | TKR | Spain | European | K/L score | Multiplex single-base extension | PB | 262 | 294 |
| TKR | UK | European | K/L score | Multiplex single-base extension | PB | 360 | 698 | ||
| TKR | Greece | European | K/L score | Multiplex single-base extension | PB | 159 | 193 | ||
| 2009 | I. Kerna | TFOA | Estonian | European | OA score | PCR-RFLP | PB | 66 | 123 |
| PFOA | Estonian | European | OA score | PCR-RFLP | PB | 97 | 92 | ||
| 2012 | Min-Ho Shin | Knee OA | Korea | Asian | K/L score | TaqMan | PB | 725 | 1737 |
| 2014 | Suliang Lou | Knee OA | China | Asian | K/L score | TaqMan | PB | 152 | 179 |
| 2015 | LinWang | Knee OA | China | Asian | K/L score | iMLDR | PB | 164 | 200 |
| 2016 | Thitiya Poonpet | Knee OA | Thai | Asian | K/L score | HRM analysis | PB | 200 | 200 |
K/L score Kellgren–Lawrence score, PB population based, TKR total knee replacement, TFOA tibiofemoral knee OA, PCR-RFLP polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism, PFOA patellofemoral knee OA, iMLDR improved multiplex ligase detection reaction, HRM high resolution melting
Distributions of ADAM2 rs3740199 genotypes and alleles among cases and controls
| Year | First author | Case | Control | Case | Control | HWE in control | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC | GC | GG | CC | GC | GG | C | G | C | G | |||
| 2009 | J. Rodriguez-Lopeza | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 290 | 234 | 327 | 261 | NA |
| 2009 | J. Rodriguez-Lopeza | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 370 | 350 | 744 | 652 | NA |
| 2009 | J. Rodriguez-Lopeza | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 180 | 138 | 239 | 147 | NA |
| 2009 | I. Kernaa | 28 | 32 | 6 | 65 | 46 | 12 | 88 | 44 | 176 | 70 | 0.366 |
| 2009 | I. Kernaa | 53 | 34 | 10 | 41 | 43 | 8 | 140 | 54 | 125 | 59 | 0.485 |
| 2012 | Min-Ho Shin | 147 | 364 | 214 | 350 | 863 | 524 | 658 | 792 | 1563 | 1911 | 0.876 |
| 2014 | Suliang Lou | 32 | 78 | 42 | 42 | 93 | 44 | 142 | 162 | 177 | 181 | 0.6 |
| 2015 | LinWang | 36 | 84 | 44 | 47 | 102 | 51 | 156 | 172 | 196 | 204 | 0.773 |
| 2016 | Thitiya Poonpet | 56 | 102 | 42 | 46 | 100 | 54 | 214 | 186 | 192 | 208 | 0.982 |
HWE Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, NA data not available
aAn independent study in one article
Meta-analysis for the ADAM2 rs3740199 polymorphism and knee OA risk
| Population | Comparison ( | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) |
|
|
| ||
| Overall | C vs. G (12) | 0.983 (0.910–1.061) | 0.657 | 0.490 | 0.0 |
| CC vs. GG (6) | 1.033 (0.851–1.255) | 0.740 | 0.681 | 0.0 | |
| CG vs. GG (6) | 1.030 (0.877–1.209) | 0.721 | 0.770 | 0.0 | |
| CC/CG vs. GG (6) | 1.031 (0.886–1.201) | 0.690 | 0.768 | 0.0 | |
| CC vs. CG/GG (6) | 1.017 (0.868–1.190) | 0.837 | 0.364 | 8.1 | |
| Ethnicity | |||||
| Asian | C vs. G (4) | 1.020 (0.924–1.127) | 0.689 | 0.398 | 0.0 |
| CC vs. GG (4) | 1.040 (0.850–1.272) | 0.703 | 0.390 | 0.4 | |
| CG vs. GG (4) | 1.035 (0.878–1.221) | 0.681 | 0.709 | 0.0 | |
| CC/CG vs. GG (4) | 1.036 (0.887–1.211) | 0.656 | 0.502 | 0.0 | |
| CC vs. CG/GG (4) | 1.017 (0.858–1.207) | 0.843 | 0.642 | 0.0 | |
| European | C vs. G (8) | 0.930 (0.825–1.049) | 0.239 | 0.538 | 0.0 |
| CC vs. GG (2) | 0.950 (0.453–1.992) | 0.891 | 0.809 | 0.0 | |
| CG vs. GG (2) | 0.927 (0.446–1.930) | 0.840 | 0.301 | 6.6 | |
| CC/CG vs. GG (2) | 0.940 (0.465–1.901) | 0.864 | 0.713 | 0.0 | |
| CC vs. CG/GG (2) | 0.998 (0.445–2.237) | 0.996 | 0.052 | 73.4 | |
OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval
aNumber of comparison
b P values for within group differences were determined by Z test
c P value of Q test for heterogeneity test
Fig. 2Begg’s funnel plot for publication bias test (C versus G). Each point represented a separate study for the indicated association. logor natural logarithm of OR. Horizontal line mean effect size