Association of MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and leukemia risk: evidence from a meta-analysis
Association of MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and leukemia risk: evidence from a meta-analysis
复制标题
MDR1 G2677T 多态性与白血病风险的关联：来自荟萃分析的证据
作者：
Yulan Yan;Hongjie Liang;Li Xie;Yu He;Meng Li;Ruolin Li;Shan Li;X. Qin
鉴于MDR 1 G2677 T多态性与白血病风险之间的关系仍然是包容性的或有争议的。为了更好地了解MDR 1 G2677 T多态性对白血病风险的影响，我们进行了荟萃分析。通过检索PubMed、Excerpta Medica数据库（Embase）、科克伦图书馆和中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）等电子数据库确定合格研究。MDR 1 G2677 T多态性与白血病风险之间的关联通过比值比（OR）和95%置信区间（95%CI）进行。荟萃分析共纳入了7篇出版物，包括8项研究（1，229例病例和1，097例对照）。MDR 1 G2677 T多态性与白血病风险在总体人群中的所有五种模型中均无关联（T vs. G：OR = 1.00，95% CI = 0.88-1.12，P = 0.914; TT vs. GG：OR = 0.97，95% CI = 0.75-1.26，P = 0.812; TG vs. GG：OR = 1.00，95% CI = 0.92-1.08，P = 0.939; TT vs. TG/GG：OR = 0.98，95% CI = 0.67-1.43，P = 0.906; TT/TG vs. GG：OR = 1.00，95% CI = 0.95-1.06，P = 0.994）。然而，在纯合子模型（TT vs. GG：OR = 0.68，95% CI = 0.48-0.94，P = 0.020）和隐性模型（TT vs. TG/GG：OR = 0.63，95% CI = 0.43-0.92，P = 0.016）下，在其他患者中发现了显著相关性（表2）。在亚组分析中，根据白血病类型，MDR 1 G2677 T多态性与髓系白血病有显著相关性，而与淋巴细胞白血病无显著相关性（TT vs. GG：OR = 0.66，95% CI = 0.46-0.95，P = 0.026; TT vs. TG/GG：OR = 0.56，95% CI = 0.38-0.84，P = 0.005）。结果表明，MDR 1基因G2677 T多态性在总体人群中与白血病易感性无关，但在其他人群（亚洲人和非洲人）中与白血病易感性显著相关，提示MDR 1基因G2677 T多态性可能是髓系白血病易感性的保护性因素，在亚洲人和非洲人中可能是髓系白血病易感性的保护性因素。
In the light of the relationship between the MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and the risk of leukemia remains inclusive or controversial. For better understanding of the effect of MDR1 G2677T polymorphism on leukemia risk, we performed a meta-analysis. Eligible studies were identified through a search of electronic databases such as PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM). The association between the MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and leukemia risk was conducted by odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI). A total of seven publications including eight studies with 1,229 cases and 1,097 controls were included in the meta-analysis. There was no association between MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and leukemia risk in all of five models in overall populations (T vs. G: OR = 1.00, 95 % CI = 0.88–1.12, P = 0.914; TT vs. GG: OR = 0.97, 95 % CI = 0.75–1.26, P = 0.812; TG vs. GG: OR = 1.00, 95 % CI = 0.92–1.08, P = 0.939; TT vs. TG/GG: OR = 0.98, 95 % CI = 0.67–1.43, P = 0.906; TT/TG vs. GG: OR = 1.00, 95 % CI = 0.95–1.06, P = 0.994). However, the significant association was found in others (Table 2) under the homozygote model (TT vs. GG: OR = 0.68, 95 % CI = 0.48–0.94, P = 0.020) and recessive model (TT vs. TG/GG: OR = 0.63, 95 % CI = 0.43–0.92, P = 0.016). In the subgroup analysis, according to the type of leukemia, significant association was found between MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and myeloid leukemia but not lymphoblastic leukemia (TT vs. GG: OR = 0.66, 95 % CI = 0.46–0.95, P = 0.026; TT vs. TG/GG: OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.38–0.84, P = 0.005). The results suggested that there was no association between MDR1 G2677T polymorphism and leukemia risk in overall populations, but significant association was found in others populations (Asians and Africans), and myeloid leukemia indicated that G2677T polymorphism might be a protective factor in the susceptibility of myeloid leukemia and in Asians and Africans.
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Gruhn, Bernd;Naumann, Thomas;Sonnemann, Juergen
通讯作者：
Sonnemann, Juergen