Literature DB >> 30854108

The Role of Polymorphisms in Genes of PI3K/Akt Signaling Pathway on Prostate.

Wei Xu1,2, Zhihao Ni3, Meng Zhang1, Jinbo Chen4, Li Zhang1, Song Wu5, Chaozhao Liang1.   

Abstract

Background and Objective: Increasing evidence suggested that polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway were closely related to prostate cancer (PCa) risk. Nevertheless, these results are controversial and inconclusive. Here, we conducted a comprehensive updated meta-analysis and systematic review to precisely illustrate the association between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk. Materials and
Methods: The gene set of PI3K/Akt pathway was referenced from the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) website. Relevant studies were identified by the systematically researching on PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases up to October 1, 2017. The odds ratios (ORs) with a corresponding 95% confidential intervals (95%CIs) were applied to test their associations. All the analyses were conducted by using Stata 12.0 (Stata Corporation, USA).
Results: Finally, 38 articles comprising 62 case-control studies were enrolled for 13 polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway. However, overall results failed to present a positive association between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk. Nevertheless, in the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, we identified that IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of PCa for Caucasian individuals in dominant model (MM + MW vs. WW: OR = 1.245, 95%CI = 1.176-1.318, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Our work suggests that polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt Signaling Pathway are not risk factor for PCa. Further well-designed studies with larger samples and precise designs are demanded to corroborate our findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PI3K/Akt; polymorphism; prostate cancer

Year:  2019        PMID: 30854108      PMCID: PMC6400800          DOI: 10.7150/jca.26472

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer        ISSN: 1837-9664            Impact factor:   4.207


Introduction

For males worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) has the second highest incidence of all cancers. Each year, approximately 238,590 new cases and 29,720 deaths are reported according to cancer statistics, 2013. In view of the anfractuous pathogenesis of PCa, interconnected cell signaling pathways and transmissions which manipulates the survival, evolution and apoptosis of cells1-3, would provide us new inspirations of the prevention and treatment of PCa patients. Among diverse pathways, genes encompassed in phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt signaling pathway, such as toll-like receptor-4 (TLR4), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), interleukin 6 (IL-6), insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1), appear with more common mutations or amplifications in PCa (Figure and Figure ). PI3K is a phosphatidylinositol kinase which is encoded by the PIK3CA gene. It consists of a catalytic subunit p110 and regulatory subunit p85. Akt is a cytoplasmic serine-threonine protein kinase which promotes the progression of cell cycle and inhibits cell apoptosis. The PI3K/Akt signaling pathway is implicated in different cellular functions, including survival, growth, proliferation, metabolism and angiogenesis. Currently, the relationships between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk have been an area of intense investigations but with mixed results4,5. For instance, Balistreri et al.6 pointed out that there existed a significant association between polymorphisms in TRL4 and an increased risk of PCa, a result consistent with both Wang et al.'s7 and Chen et al.'s8 work. However, Shui et al.9 has conducted a case-control study comprising 1,267 controls and 1,286 PCa cases and found that genetic variation across TLR4 alone is not strongly associated with PCa risk. As for polymorphisms in IGF1, Schildkraut et al.10 revealed the significant association between genetic polymorphisms in IGF1 and PCa risk among Black and White men. On the contrary, Neuhausen et al.11 failed to find any positive connection between IGF1 polymorphisms and PCa risk. In addition, for IL-6-rs1800795, both Kesarwani et al.12 and Mandal et al.'s13 studies supported the role of IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism in PCa, while the result was inconsistent with Bao et al.'s14 work. Hence, previous studies had presented inconsistent views between polymorphisms encompassed in genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk. Considering that, we conducted the current updated meta-analysis in order to precisely evaluate their associations on the foundation of all available eligible studies, providing with convincible evidence for the prevention and/or targeted therapy for PCa patients.

Material and Methods

Acquisition of the PI3K/Akt Pathway Gene Set

The gene set of PI3K/Akt pathway was referenced to the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) website (http://www.kegg.jp/kegg-bin/show_pathway?hsa04151). The gene set was originally provided via the KEGG signaling database, and encompassed the following 101 genes: ANGPT2, ANGPT4, IL2RB, CD19, COL1A, IL3, COL2A, IL3RA, COL4A, COL6A, IL6, COL9A, CSF1, CSF1R, CSF3, CSF3R, EFNA, EGF, EGFR, EPHA2, EPO, EPOR, FGF, FGF1, FGF2, FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, FGFR4, FLT1, FLT4, GH, GHR, IL6R, GRB2, HGF, HRAS, IFNA, IFNAR1, IFNAR2, IFNB, IGF1, IGF1R, IGH, IL2, IL2RA, IL2RG, IL4, IL4R, IL7, IL7R, INS, INSR, IRS1, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, KDR, KIT, KITLG, KRAS, LAMA1_2, LAMA3_5, LAMA4, LAMB1, LAMB2, LAMB3, LAMB4, LAMC1, LAMC2, MAP2K1, MAP2K2, MAPK1, MAPK2, MAPK3, MET, NGFA, NGFB, NGFR, NRAS, OSM, OSMR, PDGFA, PDGFB, PDGFC_D, PDGFRA, PDGFRB, PGF, PIK3AP1, PRL, PRLR, RAC1, RAF1, SOS, SYK, TEK, TLR2, TLR4, VEGFA, VEGFB and VEGFC-D.

Study Description

To evaluate the connections between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk, we conducted the present study by combining all accessible studies together from diverse databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. The integrated keywords were: ('genes' OR 'abbreviations of genes') AND ('cancer' OR 'tumor' OR 'carcinoma' OR 'neoplasms') AND ('polymorphism' OR 'mutation' OR 'variant' OR 'SNP' OR 'genotype'). At the same time, we used the integrated keywords (Gene_ID & prostate cancer) to search on Google, and performed the hand screening from all highly connected results. Besides, extra studies were collected via the reference lists of the identified studies. The final date of retrieval was in October 1, 2017. The whole studies in the analysis were firstly published in the primary literature with no reproduction in other studies.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria in this analysis were: (1) the cases were PCa patients and the controls were no history of cancers; 2) cohort studies or case-control studies concerning the relationships between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk; (3) the raw data of genotype frequency can be extracted. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) the raw data were not accessible; (2) case-only studies that didn't have control groups; (3) family-based association studies; and (4) Review papers.

Data Extraction

All of the data extraction work should be completed independently by 2 of the authors according to the prelisted inclusion criteria. And the arguments should be solved by another expert(s). You didn't mention the procedure in your article. In addition, we extracted data from each case-control study, including genotype frequencies, name of first author; year of publication; ethnicity and number of cases and controls. In addition, we used The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the quality of enrolled studies.

Statistical analysis

The meta-analysis was conducted to assess the associations between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk. Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in the control group was tested15. To make a more comprehensive meta-analysis, five genetic models were adopted, including allele contrast (M vs. W), codominant (MM vs. WW and MW vs. WW), dominant (MM + MW vs. WW) and recessive models (MM vs. MW + WW). The impact of relationship was evaluated by odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidential intervals (95%CI). What's more, when the heterogeneity (P > 0.1 as the standard) 16 was assessed, the I2-based Q statistic was used (I2 = 0-25%: no heterogeneity; I2 = 25%-50%: moderate heterogeneity; I2 = 50%-75%: large heterogeneity; I2 = 75%-100%: extreme heterogeneity) 17, which represented the weighted sum of the squared difference between the overall effect size and the effect size from every study. When I2 > 50% or PQ ≤ 0.1, substantial heterogeneity was existed, then, a random-effects model was used; otherwise, the fixed-effects model was be applied. It has been recognized that when results of the component studies differ among themselves, random effects incorporate an estimate of the inter-study variance and provide wider 95%CIs18. The analyses were conducted using Stata 12.0 (Stata Corporation, USA), and all P values were two-tailed.

Results

Main Characteristics of the Enrolled Studies

After initial screening, there were 1,166 results related to the search words enrolled. After reading the important information such as the titles and abstracts, 51 potential eligible studies were selected for next step full-text view. When a further screening was conducted, 13 of these studies were excluded for not associated with PCa risk. Finally, 38 articles with 62 case-control studies were left for data extraction (Table ) 12,19-54. Of them, there were 2,170 cases and 1,587 controls for TLR4-rs1927914 polymorphism (from three studies), 3,842 cases and 3,143 controls for TLR4-rs10759932 polymorphism (from 4 studies), 3,508 cases and 2,960 controls for TLR4-rs2149356 polymorphism (from 4 studies), 1,467 cases and 1,551 controls for TLR4-rs4986790 polymorphism (from 4 studies), 3,985 cases and 3,438 controls for TLR4-rs11536889 polymorphism (from 5 studies), 2,380 cases and 2,357 controls for TLR4-rs7873784 polymorphism (from 3 studies), 632 cases and 685 controls for VEGF-rs833061 polymorphism (from three studies), 1,511 cases and 821 controls for VEGF-rs1570360 polymorphism (from three studies), 1,243 cases and 1,620 controls for IRS1-rs1801278 polymorphism (from four studies), 2,289 cases and 2,114 controls for FGFR4-rs351855 polymorphism (from three studies), 1,805 cases and 3,235 controls for IL-6-rs1800796 polymorphism (from three studies), 10,625 cases and 12,353 controls for IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism (from eight studies), 2,217 cases and 2,471 controls for IGF1-(CA) 19 polymorphism (from seven studies), respectively. In addition, the study selection processes for these polymorphisms were showed in Figure . Furthermore, of the 62 case-control studies, 41 sets were performed on Caucasian populations, seven sets on Asian populations, six sets on African populations, and the other eight were based on mixed ethnic groups (including at least one race). Controls of 42 studies were population-based (P-B), while the other 20 studies were hospital-based (H-B). The quality of the enrolled studies was assessed by NOS and presented in Table .

Quantitative synthesis

Results of the association between polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk were showed in Table However, the pooled results suggested negative associations between all the 13 polymorphisms in six genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk. However, in the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, we found that IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of PCa in dominant model for Caucasian population (MM + MW vs. WW: OR=1.245, 95%CI = 1.176-1.318, P < 0.001, Figure ). Furthermore, in the subgroup analysis by source of control, we also found an increased risk of PCa for P-B groups in dominant model (MM + MW vs. WW; OR = 1.246, 95%CI = 1.177-1.319, P < 0.001, Figure ). Although subgroup analyses were also conducted for other polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway, negative results were found.

Sensitivity analysis and Publication bias

Sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding one single study each time, and no evidence was observed suggesting pooled ORs shift (Table ). In addition, we used Begg's funnel plot and Egger's regression test to assess potential publication bias. As for TLR4-rs1927914, TLR4-rs10759932, TLR4-rs2149356, TLR4-rs4986790, TLR4-rs11536889, TLR4-rs7873784, VEGF-rs833061, VEGF-rs1570360, IRS1-rs1801278, FGFR4-rs351855, IL-6-rs1800796, IGF1-(CA)19 polymorphisms, no evidence of publication bias was identified by viewing the shape of Begg's funnel plot, which was further validated by Egger's regression test. However, for IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism, potential publication bias was existed (P = 0.016) (Table . In that case, we further conducted sensitivity analysis by using the trim and fill method55, and imputed studies provide a symmetrical funnel plot (data not shown), indicating publication bias was not existed.

Discussion

Recently, enormous studies suggested that polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway may play an important role in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of PCa. For example, TLR4 is the main component of TLRs and has been positively investigated in inflammation and cancer. Previous studies had confirmed that two polymorphisms in TLR4 (rs4986790 and rs4986791) owned susceptibility to various type of cancers, including PCa56. VEGF is the most significant regulator of angiogenesis in human, and it plays a significant role in the occurrence and development of PCa49,50. It had been identified that there were many genetic variants in the VEFG gene57, but the conclusions were remained inconsistent23,52-57. The IRS1 gene Gly972Arg (rs1801278) polymorphisms had been found a significant association with increased cancer risk58. In vitro studies have proved that the IRS1 gene rs1801278 polymorphism impaired insulin-stimulated signaling pathway, especially through the PI3-kinase pathway59. What's more, as a docking protein for the insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF1R) 60,61, IRS1 controls IGF-1 mediated cell growth and survival60. Thus the polymorphisms of IGF-1 gene also related to the cancer risks including PCa61. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 4 (FGFR4) is one member of the family of fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR1-4), which displays complicated biological activities such as angiogenic and mitogenic activity. Previous study had presented that its gene polymorphism was related to PCa risks62. The human IL-6 gene encodes IL-6, a cytokine which adjusts the level of inflammation. Two polymorphisms on the promoter region of IL-6, rs1800795 (-174G/C) and rs1800796 (-572C/G) have been identified to be associated with IL-6 production63. And these association with risks of cancer have been published in a previous meta-analysis64,65. Furthermore, although these studies and meta-analysis provided some clues for separate polymorphisms in one or more genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk, these results were not fully consistent, or even contradictory at sometimes. Therefore, we performed current meta-analysis in order to provide a comprehensive accurate assessment of the associations of these polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway with PCa risk. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first pooled study that analyzed the associations between 13 polymorphisms in six pivotal genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk. Meanwhile, further analyses were conducted in different subgroups to explore the potential associations or heterogeneity sources. Nevertheless, overall results revealed that none of these polymorphisms was associated with PCa risk. Then, we performed subgroup analysis based on ethnicity, source of control (population-based or hospital-based) and HWE status (conform or not conform). For IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism, when the stratification analysis was conducted by ethnicity, we found that a statistically significant increased risk of PCa was identified in the dominant model for Caucasians. However, in the meta-analysis conducted by Liu et al.66, they did not reveal a significant connection between IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism and PCa risk in Caucasian. For other polymorphisms, null association was uncovered when the stratified analyses were conducted based on ethnicity, source of control or HWE status. Although we were surprised by these negative results, the high quality of these included studies and the substantial amount of data strengthened the possibility that the lack of association was not caused by chance. For those comparisons that did not exhibit a statistically significant association, may be as a result of the characteristics of low-penetrance genes. Moreover, although these polymorphisms assessed were appropriate candidates, they only account for some of the factors, and ignored other factors such as obesity, diet and environment. We summarized the advantages of current work. Firstly, although many meta-analyses provided some clues for separate polymorphisms in one or more genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk, the current one provide a more comprehensive accurate assessment of the associations of all available polymorphisms in genes of PI3K/Akt pathway with PCa risk. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first pooled study that analyzed the associations between 13 polymorphisms in six pivotal genes of PI3K/Akt pathway and PCa risk. Secondly, we applied classic formula to adjust the P-values, which removed most of the marginal or false-positive P-values, making the final pool results more convincing. Thirdly, we found IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism could be served as a risk prediction marker for Caucasian PCa patients. Our results provided some clues for the future clinical research that polymorphisms in genes of this pathway may not suitable for high-risk prostate cancer patients' screening. There are also several deficiencies that should be addressed. Firstly, other factors such as the density of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), living conditions and histological types, the stage and grades of PCa should be included to get more precise results. Secondly, for many polymorphisms of these inclusive genes, relatively small samples were included for the assessment, such as rs1927914 polymorphism. Finally, we ignored that there were many individual characters such as age, obesity, alcohol, consumption and other lifestyle risk factors which could influence our conclusions. Overall, our meta-analysis provided no statistically significant association between the 13 polymorphisms in six genes of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and PCa risk. However, a significantly increased risk of PCa in Caucasian individuals was identified for IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism in the dominant model. Due to the limitations of these included studies, as well as the risk factors we ignored, further well-designed studies with larger samples are warranted to verify our findings. Supplementary figures and tables. Click here for additional data file.
Table 1

Characteristics of the enrolled studies.

GeneSNPFirst AuthorYearGenotyping MethodEthnicitySource of ControlCaseControl
WWWMMMWWWMMMY(HWE)
TLR4rs1927914Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B2973016029028891Y
rs1927914Zheng et al.2004MassARRAYCaucasianP-B62559615434135481Y
rs1927914Song et al.2009PCR-RFLPAsianH-B69541448877N
rs10759932Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B5111551147219712Y
rs10759932Zheng et al.2004MassARRAYCaucasianP-B9913503457119413Y
rs10759932Shui et al.2012MALDI-TOFCaucasianP-B8972602790824427N
rs10759932Cheng et al.2007SequencingCaucasianH-B3701171193581434N
rs2149356Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B3202866130527591N
rs2149356Zheng et al.2004MassARRAYCaucasianP-B60342313633122474N
rs2149356Shui et al.2012MALDI-TOFCaucasianP-B579489106576460119Y
rs2149356Cheng et al.2007SequencingCaucasianH-B1972238521021382N
rs4986790Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B588663605595N
rs4986790Cheng et al.2007TaqManCaucasianH-B439661456482Y
rs4986790Wang et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B230240216350Y
rs4986790Balistreri et al.2010PCR-RFLPCaucasianH-B4910111131Y
rs11536889Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B5151671051315915Y
rs11536889Zheng et al.2004MassARRAYCaucasianP-B10473181562514112Y
rs11536889Shui et al.2012MALDI-TOFCaucasianP-B9092023289729127Y
rs11536889Cheng et al.2007SequencingCaucasianH-B385105164019312N
rs11536889Wang et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B178797175716Y
rs7873784Chen et al.2005MassARRAYCaucasianP-B4751781645918030N
rs7873784Shui et al.2012MALDI-TOFCaucasianP-B8872952486130219Y
rs7873784Cheng et al.2007SequencingCaucasianH-B3621301334614614Y
IL-6rs1800796Wang et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B233191225250Y
rs1800796Pierce et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B15619017401922Y
rs1800796Pierce et al.2009TaqManMixedP-B3721251416N
rs1800796Sun et al.2004MicroarrayCaucasianP-B12261092675744Y
rs1800795Mandal et al.2014PCRMixedH-B1084412744422N
rs1800795Zhang et al.2010SequenomMixedP-B8086271007522Y
rs1800795Zabaleta et al.2009TaqManCaucasianH-B193421126163112N
rs1800795Zabaleta et al.2009TaqManMixedH-B102341106N
rs1800795Dossus et al.2010GoldenGateCaucasianP-B35943218112538323402274N
rs1800795Wang et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B91116438412840Y
rs1800795Moore et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B191485281196401250Y
rs1800795Pierce et al.2009TaqManCaucasianP-B489631648805305N
rs1800795Pierce et al.2009TaqManMixedP-B3451216431Y
rs1800795Kesarwani et al.2008PCRAsiaH-B10284141038710Y
rs1800795Bao et al.2008TaqManAsiaP-B1360012000N
rs1800795Michaud et al.2006TaqManCaucasianP-B1702239123029390Y
IGF1(CA)19Chu et al.2006SequenomCaucasianP-B752821737625Y
(CA)19Chu et al.2006SequenomMixedP-B4171722016Y
(CA)19Neuhausen et al.2005PCRCaucasianH-B78862910712432Y
(CA)19Schildkraut et al.2005PCRMixedP-B203935283320Y
(CA)19Norihiko et al.2005PCRAsianH-B1551301828917220Y
(CA)19Friedrichsen et al.2005PCR-RFLPMixedP-B7328921964237219Y
(CA)19Nam et al.2003PCR-RFLPMixedP-B64230189103253192Y
(CA)19Wenndy et al.2007PCRMixedH-B32428492892651N
VEGFrs833061Fukuda et al.2007PCR-RFLPAsianH-B143103241329723Y
rs833061Onen et al.2008PCR-RFLPMixedP-B338911509413N
rs833061Lin et al.2003PCR-RFLPAsianH-B6032443724N
rs833061Onen et al.2008PCR-RFLPCaucasianP-B338911509413N
rs1570360Sfar et al.2006RFLP-PCRCaucasianH-B58376365014Y
rs1570360Jacobs et al.2008TaqManCaucasianP-B55748912621019454Y
rs1570360McCarron et al.2013TaqManCaucasianP-B1141091512010934Y
IRS1rs1801278Andrea et al.2011PCRCaucasianH-B5650106121Y
rs1801278Fall et al.2008PCRMixedH-B489732662906Y
rs1801278Li et al.2013PCRMixedP-B386502422651Y
rs1801278Neuhausen et al.2005PCRCaucasianP-B11850121608114Y
FGFR4rs351855FitzGerald et al.2009SNPlex™CaucasianP-B587544123631496124Y
rs351855FitzGerald et al.2009SNPlex™MixedP-B10439360182Y
rs351855Lee et al.2010TaqManCaucasianP-B1831823223516737Y
rs351855Zhiyong et al.2010PCRAsianH-B13319616367152125Y

Note: Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE); population-based (P-B); hospital-based (H-B); Mixed: more than two descendants; W: wild allele; M: mutated allele; PCR: Polymerase chain reaction; RFLP-PCR: restriction fragment length polymorphism-Polymerase chain reaction

Table 2

Details of the association between IL-6-rs1800795 polymorphism and prostate cancer risk.

ComparisonSubgroupNPHPZRandomFixed
M vs. WOverall110.0000.2071.108 (0.945-1.300)1.347 (1.292-1.403)
M vs. WAsia11.0000.6921.065 (0.780-1.453)1.065 (0.780-1.453)
M vs. WCaucasian60.0000.0711.171 (0.986-1.391)1.370 (1.313-1.429)
M vs. WH-B40.0200.7720.946 (0.648-1.380)0.926 (0.765-1.122)
M vs. WP-B70.0000.0381.188 (1.010-1.397)1.371 (1.315-1.431)
M vs. WN50.0000.5281.106 (0.809-1.514)1.430 (1.365-1.499)
M vs. WY60.7100.0531.090 (0.999-1.190)1.090 (0.999-1.190)
WM vs. WWOverall110.1030.2691.080 (0.951-1.227)1.033 (0.975-1.096)
WM vs. WWAsia11.0000.9030.975 (0.650-1.463)0.975 (0.650-1.463)
WM vs. WWCaucasian60.0610.1771.112 (0.953-1.296)1.036 (0.975-1.100)
WM vs. WWH-B40.3800.6780.941 (0.709-1.250)0.943 (0.716-1.243)
WM vs. WWP-B70.0540.1561.116 (0.959-1.299)1.038 (0.978-1.102)
WM vs. WWN50.0480.5121.101 (0.826-1.466)1.022 (0.958-1.089)
WM vs. WWY60.3530.2171.088 (0.935-1.266)1.092 (0.950-1.256)
MM vs. WWOverall110.0000.2111.411 (0.823-2.421)2.609 (2.359-2.885)
MM vs. WWAsia11.0000.4281.414 (0.600-3.329)1.414 (0.600-3.329)
MM vs. WWCaucasian60.0000.2141.529 (0.783-2.986)2.778 (2.502-3.085)
MM vs. WWH-B40.0430.9600.982 (0.473-2.036)0.912 (0.606-1.372)
MM vs. WWP-B70.0000.1191.671 (0.877-3.184)2.790 (2.513-3.097)
MM vs. WWN50.0000.4641.431 (0.548-3.734)3.601 (3.177-4.082)
MM vs. WWY60.6820.0251.233 (1.028-1.479)1.231 (1.027-1.477)
WM + MM vs. WWOverall110.0470.0401.147 (1.006-1.308)1.228 (1.162-1.298)
WM + MM vs. WWAsia11.0000.9201.020 (0.689-1.510)1.020 (0.689-1.510)
WM + MM vs. WWCaucasian60.292<0.0011.224 (1.113-1.346)1.245 (1.176-1.318)
WM + MM vs. WWH-B40.1140.5050.936 (0.631-1.390)0.917 (0.710-1.184)
WM + MM vs. WWP-B70.296<0.0011.227 (1.117-1.349)1.246 (1.177-1.319)
WM + MM vs. WWN50.0170.3591.150 (0.853-1.552)1.252 (1.178-1.331)
WM + MM vs. WWY60.5000.0821.124 (0.985-1.283)1.124 (0.985-1.282)
MM vs. WM + WWOverall110.0000.3151.331 (0.762-2.323)2.292 (2.093-2.509)
MM vs. WM + WWAsia11.0000.4021.430 (0.620-3.300)1.430 (0.620-3.300)
MM vs. WM + WWCaucasian60.0000.3661.388 (0.682-2.826)2.404 (2.189-2.640)
MM vs. WM + WWH-B40.0870.8660.949 (0.516-1.746)0.899 (0.618-1.308)
MM vs. WM + WWP-B70.0000.2181.543 (0.774-3.074)2.429 (2.211-2.669)
MM vs. WM + WWN50.0000.5851.323 (0.485-3.606)3.390 (3.015-3.812)
MM vs. WM + WWY60.4490.1711.114 (0.956-1.298)1.112 (0.955-1.296)

Note: Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE); P-B: population-based; H-B: hospital-based; Y: Studies conformed to HWE; N: studies did not conform to HWE; Mixed: more than two descendant; *P value less than [0.05/ (5*13)] means statistically significant.

  56 in total

1.  Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Duval; R Tweedie
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 2.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson; Jonathan J Deeks; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-06

3.  Interleukin-6 sequence variants are not associated with prostate cancer risk.

Authors:  Jielin Sun; Maria Hedelin; S Lilly Zheng; Hans-Olov Adami; Jeanette Bensen; Katarina Augustsson-Bälter; Baoli Chang; Jan Adolfsson; Tamara Adams; Aubrey Turner; Deborah A Meyers; William B Isaacs; Jianfeng Xu; Henrik Grönberg
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 4.  The contradictions of the insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor.

Authors:  R Baserga
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2000-11-20       Impact factor: 9.867

5.  CA repeat polymorphism in the insulin-like growth factor-I gene is associated with increased risk of prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  Norihiko Tsuchiya; Lizhong Wang; Yohei Horikawa; Takamitsu Inoue; Hideaki Kakinuma; Shinobu Matsuura; Kazunari Sato; Osamu Ogawa; Tetsuro Kato; Tomonori Habuchi
Journal:  Int J Oncol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.650

6.  Sequence variants of toll-like receptor 4 are associated with prostate cancer risk: results from the CAncer Prostate in Sweden Study.

Authors:  S Lilly Zheng; Katarina Augustsson-Bälter; Baoli Chang; Maria Hedelin; Liwu Li; Hans-Olov Adami; Jeanette Bensen; Ge Li; Jan-Erik Johnasson; Aubrey R Turner; Tamara S Adams; Deborah A Meyers; William B Isaacs; Jianfeng Xu; Henrik Grönberg
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Vascular endothelial growth factor gene-460 C/T polymorphism is a biomarker for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Cheng-Chieh Lin; Hsi-Chin Wu; Fuu-Jen Tsai; Huey-Yi Chen; Wen-Chi Chen
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Comprehensive assessment of candidate genes and serological markers for the detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Robert K Nam; William W Zhang; John Trachtenberg; Michael A S Jewett; Marjan Emami; Danny Vesprini; William Chu; Minnie Ho; Joan Sweet; Andrew Evans; Ants Toi; Michael Pollak; Steven A Narod
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Influence of cytokine gene polymorphisms on the development of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sarah L McCarron; Stephen Edwards; Philip R Evans; Roz Gibbs; David P Dearnaley; Anna Dowe; Christine Southgate; Douglas F Easton; Rosalind A Eeles; W Martin Howell
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  The Gly972-->Arg amino acid polymorphism in IRS-1 impairs insulin secretion in pancreatic beta cells.

Authors:  O Porzio; M Federici; M L Hribal; D Lauro; D Accili; R Lauro; P Borboni; G Sesti
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 14.808

View more
  4 in total

1.  Chronic restraint stress impairs cognition via modulating HDAC2 expression.

Authors:  Jie Wu; Cui Liu; Ling Zhang; Bing He; Wei-Ping Shi; Hai-Lei Shi; Chuan Qin
Journal:  Transl Neurosci       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 1.757

2.  Identification of a novel six autophagy-related genes signature for the prognostic and a miRNA-related autophagy predictor for anti-PD-1 therapy responses in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Lei Wu; Wen Quan; Guojun Yue; Qiong Luo; Dongxu Peng; Ying Pan; Guihai Zhang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 4.430

3.  Impact of AKT1 polymorphism on DNA damage, BTG2 expression, and risk of colorectal cancer development.

Authors:  Hina Zubair; Zahid Khan; Muhammad Imran
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2022-08-14       Impact factor: 4.214

4.  Ginsenoside-Rg3 inhibits the proliferation and invasion of hepatoma carcinoma cells via regulating long non-coding RNA HOX antisense intergenic.

Authors:  Zhongjian Pu; Fei Ge; Yajun Wang; Ziyu Jiang; Shilin Zhu; Shukui Qin; Qijun Dai; Hua Liu; Haiqing Hua
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 3.269

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.