Mao Xiying1, Wu Wenbo2, Fang Wangyi1, Liu Qinghuai3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China. 2. Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China. Electronic address: liuqh0545@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the worldwide leading cause of blindness among the elderly, especially in developed countries. The possible association between apolipoprotein E (ApoE) polymorphism (ε2, ε3, ε4) and AMD has been extensively investigated with conflicting results, especially when specifying different clinical phenotypes of AMD. Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis by integrating several recent large-sample studies to verify the effect of ApoE polymorphisms on AMD subtypes. METHODS: The retrieve for targeted literature was conducted based on the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science. Summary odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for estimation of risk. The p-value was adjusted due to the multiple comparison. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies included in the final summary analysis, including 13842 cases and 38647 controls. ApoE ε4 carrier was inversely associated with early stage AMD (OR = 0.889, 95% CI = 0.82-0.97), geographic atrophy (OR = 0.594, 95% CI = 0.43-0.83) and neovascular AMD (OR = 0.670, 95% CI = 0.58-0.76). Stratification analysis by ethnicity revealed that the ApoE ε4 carriers was associated with neovascular AMD in both Caucasians (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.47-0.83) and East Asians (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.58-0.79). A significant association of ApoE ε2 carriers was only found with early AMD in Black and East Asian population, however small samples and limited studies restrict its generalization. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis revealed a significantly protective role of ε4 on each subtypes of AMD, but no supportive evidence of the association of ε2 with AMD. Thus, further studies with larger samples are needed to understand the precise role of ε2 on AMD susceptibility.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the worldwide leading cause of blindness among the elderly, especially in developed countries. The possible association between apolipoprotein E (ApoE) polymorphism (ε2, ε3, ε4) and AMD has been extensively investigated with conflicting results, especially when specifying different clinical phenotypes of AMD. Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis by integrating several recent large-sample studies to verify the effect of ApoE polymorphisms on AMD subtypes. METHODS: The retrieve for targeted literature was conducted based on the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science. Summary odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for estimation of risk. The p-value was adjusted due to the multiple comparison. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies included in the final summary analysis, including 13842 cases and 38647 controls. ApoE ε4 carrier was inversely associated with early stage AMD (OR = 0.889, 95% CI = 0.82-0.97), geographic atrophy (OR = 0.594, 95% CI = 0.43-0.83) and neovascular AMD (OR = 0.670, 95% CI = 0.58-0.76). Stratification analysis by ethnicity revealed that the ApoE ε4 carriers was associated with neovascular AMD in both Caucasians (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.47-0.83) and East Asians (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.58-0.79). A significant association of ApoE ε2 carriers was only found with early AMD in Black and East Asian population, however small samples and limited studies restrict its generalization. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis revealed a significantly protective role of ε4 on each subtypes of AMD, but no supportive evidence of the association of ε2 with AMD. Thus, further studies with larger samples are needed to understand the precise role of ε2 on AMD susceptibility.
Authors: Sarah C Conner; Laurent Benayoun; Jayandra J Himali; Stephanie L Adams; Qiong Yang; Charles DeCarli; Jan K Blusztajn; Alexa Beiser; Sudha Seshadri; Ivana Delalle Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Milica A Margeta; Zhuoran Yin; Charlotte Madore; Kristen M Pitts; Sophia M Letcher; Jing Tang; Shuhong Jiang; Christian D Gauthier; Sebastian R Silveira; Caitlin M Schroeder; Eleonora M Lad; Alan D Proia; Rudolph E Tanzi; David M Holtzman; Susanne Krasemann; Dong Feng Chen; Oleg Butovsky Journal: Immunity Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 43.474
Authors: Marina Gm Viturino; Jamil M Neto; Flávia F Bajano; Sueli Ms Costa; Alicia B Roque; Gessica Fs Borges; Galina Ananina; Priscila Hh Rim; Flávio M Medina; Fernando F Costa; José Pc de Vasconcellos; Mônica B de Melo Journal: Exp Biol Med (Maywood) Date: 2021-01-19
Authors: Milica A Margeta; Sophia M Letcher; Robert P Igo; Jessica N Cooke Bailey; Louis R Pasquale; Jonathan L Haines; Oleg Butovsky; Janey L Wiggs Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Lauren K Wareham; Shane A Liddelow; Sally Temple; Larry I Benowitz; Adriana Di Polo; Cheryl Wellington; Jeffrey L Goldberg; Zhigang He; Xin Duan; Guojun Bu; Albert A Davis; Karthik Shekhar; Anna La Torre; David C Chan; M Valeria Canto-Soler; John G Flanagan; Preeti Subramanian; Sharyn Rossi; Thomas Brunner; Diane E Bovenkamp; David J Calkins Journal: Mol Neurodegener Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 18.879
Authors: Lucie Dlouha; Terezie Pelikanova; Jiří Veleba; Vera Adamkova; Vera Lanska; Tomas Sosna; Lukas Pacal; Katerina Kankova; Jaroslav A Hubacek Journal: Mol Biol Rep Date: 2021-07-30 Impact factor: 2.316