| Literature DB >> 34334784 |
Manni Sun1, Hui Jiang1, Tao Meng1, Peiyan Liu1, Haiying Chen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) plays a pivotal role in the innate immune response and is hyperactivated in preeclampsia (PE). Several researchers have published conflicting evidence for TLR4 rs4986790 and rs4986791 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as risk factors for PE. The present meta-analysis was conducted to obtain a more definitive conclusion about the effects of these SNPs on PE susceptibility. MATERIAL AND METHODS To determine the correlation between rs4986790 and rs4986791 polymorphisms in the TLR4 gene and susceptibility to PE, the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese WANFANG databases were searched for eligible articles. Statistical analysis was performed with STATA software, version 12.0. Pooled odds ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted for assessment of correlation strength. RESULTS We identified 5 studies including 578 cases and 631 controls for the rs4986790 SNP and 4 studies including 469 cases and 457 controls for the rs4986791 SNP, mainly from a White population. The pooled analyses showed no statistical relationship between the polymorphisms rs4986790 and rs4986791 and PE susceptibility in 5 genetic models (all P>0.05). Moreover, the allelic and dominant gene models of rs4986790 and the allelic, heterozygous, and dominant gene models of rs4986791 had high heterogeneity. The sensitivity analysis explored potential sources of heterogeneity and confirmed the findings of this meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS TLR4 rs4986790 and rs4986791 polymorphisms may not be implicated in PE susceptibility, primarily in a White population. More high-quality studies of genetic associations with PE are warranted.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34334784 PMCID: PMC8343538 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.930438
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Flowchart of the literature search and study selection process.
Characteristics of the included studies.
| First Author | Published Year | Country | Race | Genotyping method | Cases/controls | Specimen | Source of cases | Source of controls | HWE ( | NOS score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vamvakopoulou | 2019 | Greece | Caucasian | Automated cycle sequencing | 84/94 | Blood | EOP | Heathy women | >0.05 | 7 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh | 2019 | Iran | Caucasian | PCR-RFLP | 111/115 | Placenta | PE | Healthy pregnancies | >0.05 | 7 |
| Franchim | 2011 | Brazil | Mixed | PCR-RFLP | 109/174 | Blood | PE | Healthy pregnancies | >0.05 | 8 |
| Xie | 2010 | Canada | Caucasian | RT-PCR | 94/76 | Blood | PE | Healthy pregnancies | >0.05 | 8 |
| Molvare | 2008 | Hungary | Caucasian | PCR-RFLP | 180/172 | Blood | PE | Healthy pregnancies | >0.05 | 8 |
Distribution of TLR4 genotypes and alleles among patients and controls.
| First Author (year) | Cases | Controls | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | GA | AA | G | A | GG+GA | GA+AA | GG | GA | AA | G | A | GG+GA | GA+AA | |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 2 | 12 | 70 | 16 | 152 | 14 | 82 | 0 | 6 | 88 | 6 | 182 | 6 | 94 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 0 | 12 | 99 | 12 | 210 | 12 | 111 | 1 | 16 | 98 | 18 | 212 | 17 | 114 |
| Franchim (2011) | 0 | 7 | 102 | 7 | 211 | 7 | 109 | 1 | 18 | 134 | 20 | 286 | 19 | 152 |
| Xie (2010) | 1 | 12 | 81 | 14 | 174 | 13 | 93 | 0 | 18 | 158 | 18 | 334 | 18 | 176 |
| Molvare (2008) | 0 | 15 | 165 | 15 | 345 | 15 | 180 | 1 | 21 | 150 | 23 | 321 | 22 | 171 |
| TT | TC | CC | T | C | TT+TC | TC+CC | TT | TC | CC | T | C | TT+TC | TC+CC | |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 2 | 14 | 68 | 18 | 150 | 16 | 82 | 0 | 6 | 88 | 6 | 182 | 6 | 94 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 0 | 7 | 104 | 7 | 215 | 7 | 111 | 1 | 9 | 105 | 11 | 219 | 10 | 114 |
| Xie (2010) | 0 | 8 | 86 | 8 | 180 | 8 | 94 | 0 | 14 | 162 | 14 | 338 | 14 | 176 |
| Molvare (2008) | 0 | 15 | 165 | 15 | 345 | 15 | 180 | 1 | 22 | 149 | 24 | 320 | 23 | 171 |
Main results for pooled ORs in the meta-analysis.
| Genetic model | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | Test of publication bias (Egger) | Type of model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | T | ||||||
| G vs A | 0.96 | 0.51–1.78 | 0.887 | 67.9 | 0.014 | 1.28 | 0.289 | Random |
| GG vs AA | 1.22 | 0.38–3.90 | 0.740 | 0.0 | 0.438 | −1.53 | 0.225 | Fixed |
| GG vs GA | 1.18 | 0.32–4.34 | 0.802 | 0.0 | 0.814 | −0.53 | 0.630 | Fixed |
| GG+GA vs AA | 0.94 | 0.53–1.67 | 0.826 | 59.8 | 0.041 | 1.40 | 0.256 | Random |
| GG vs GA+AA | 1.22 | 0.38–3.93 | 0.743 | 0.0 | 0.479 | −1.40 | 0.255 | Fixed |
| T vs C | 1.07 | 0.48–2.38 | 0.871 | 71.5 | 0.015 | 0.87 | 0.474 | Random |
| TT vs CC | 1.08 | 0.03–4.63 | 0.922 | 17.8 | 0.296 | −40.8 | 0.016 | Fixed |
| TT vs TC | 0.82 | 0.15–4.47 | 0.818 | 0.0 | 0.727 | −2.17 | 0.275 | Fixed |
| TT+TC vs CC | 1.07 | 0.50–2.29 | 0.854 | 65.9 | 0.032 | 0.95 | 0.441 | Random |
| TT vs TC+CC | 1.05 | 0.24–4.57 | 0.953 | 8.7 | 0.334 | −41.69 | 0.015 | Fixed |
Figure 2Forest plots for associations between TLR4 polymorphisms and preeclampsia risk in the (A) allelic model of rs4986790: G vs A; (B) dominant model of rs4986790: GG+GA vs AA; (C) allelic model of rs4986791: T vs C; (D) heterozygous model of rs4986791: TC vs CC; and (E) dominant model of rs4986791: TT+TC vs CC.
Results of the sensitivity analysis.
| Except | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | ||||
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 0.74 | 0.52–1.08 | 0.118 | 40.1 | 0.171 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 0.99 | 0.68–1.44 | 0.972 | 74.3 | 0.009 |
| Franchim (2011) | 1.05 | 0.73–1.51 | 0.808 | 69.9 | 0.019 |
| Xie (2010) | 0.81 | 0.56–1.18 | 0.271 | 70.5 | 0.017 |
| Molvarec (2008) | 1.06 | 0.72–1.56 | 0.765 | 71.5 | 0.015 |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 0.75 | 0.51–1.10 | 0.135 | 22.2 | 0.278 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 0.96 | 0.65–1.42 | 0.847 | 68.2 | 0.024 |
| Franchim (2011) | 1.02 | 0.70–1.51 | 0.905 | 61.5 | 0.051 |
| Xie (2010) | 0.80 | 0.54–1.19 | 0.278 | 63.5 | 0.042 |
| Molvarec (2008) | 1.03 | 0.69–1.55 | 0.882 | 64.3 | 0.038 |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 0.70 | 0.44–1.12 | 0.137 | 0.0 | 0.542 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 1.11 | 0.72–1.12 | 0.643 | 79.4 | 0.008 |
| Xie (2010) | 1.00 | 0.64–1.55 | 0.980 | 80.9 | 0.005 |
| Molvarec (2008) | 1.42 | 0.85–2.35 | 0.179 | 70.1 | 0.035 |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 0.76 | 0.47–1.24 | 0.271 | 0.0 | 0.630 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 1.06 | 0.67–1.70 | 0.803 | 69.3 | 0.039 |
| Xie (2010) | 1.00 | 0.61–1.60 | 0.914 | 70.2 | 0.035 |
| Molvarec (2008) | 1.38 | 0.80–2.37 | 0.249 | 47.0 | 0.152 |
| Vamvakopoulou (2019) | 0.73 | 0.45–1.74 | 0.192 | 0.0 | 0.582 |
| Mohammadpour-Gharehbagh (2019) | 1.09 | 0.69–1.72 | 0.721 | 75.9 | 0.016 |
| Xie (2010) | 1.00 | 0.62–1.58 | 0.969 | 77.1 | 0.013 |
| Molvarec (2008) | 1.41 | 0.83–2.39 | 0.209 | 62.2 | 0.071 |
Figure 3Forest plots of sensitivity analysis after removal of data from the study by Vamvakopoulou et al under the: (A) allelic model of rs4986790: G vs A; (B) dominant model of rs4986790: GG+GA vs AA; (C) allelic model of rs4986791: T vs C; (D) heterozygous model of rs4986791: TC vs CC; (E) dominant model of rs4986791: TT+TC vs CC or by removing the data from the study by Molvarec et al under (F) heterozygous model of rs4986791: TC vs CC.