Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Studies have come to conflicting conclusions about whether polymorphisms in the adiponectin receptor 1 gene (ADIPOR1) are associated with cancer risk. To help resolve this question, we meta-analyzed case-control studies in the literature.Methods
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, the Chinese Biological Medical Database and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Database were systematically searched to identify all case-control studies published through February 2015 examining any ADIPOR1 polymorphisms and risk of any type of cancer. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.Results
A total of 13 case-control studies involving 5,750 cases and 6,762 controls were analyzed. Analysis of the entire study population revealed a significant association between rs1342387(G/A) and overall cancer risk using a homozygous model (OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.72 to 0.94), heterozygous model (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.76 to 0.93), dominant model (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.75 to 0.97) and allele contrast model (OR 0.88, 95%CI 0.80 to 0.97). However, subgroup analysis showed that this association was significant only for Asians in the case of colorectal cancer. No significant associations were found between rs12733285(C/T) or rs7539542(C/G) and cancer risk, either in analyses of the entire study population or in analyses of subgroups.Conclusions
Our meta-analysis suggests that the ADIPOR1 rs1342387(G/A) polymorphism, but not rs12733285(C/T) or rs7539542(C/G), may be associated with cancer risk, especially risk of colorectal cancer in Asians. Large, well-designed studies are needed to verify our findings.
SUBMITTER: Ye J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4457489 | biostudies-literature | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Ye Jiaxiang J Jiang Li L Wu Changliang C Liu Aiqun A Mao Sufei S Ge Lianying L
PloS one 20150605 6
<h4>Background</h4>Studies have come to conflicting conclusions about whether polymorphisms in the adiponectin receptor 1 gene (ADIPOR1) are associated with cancer risk. To help resolve this question, we meta-analyzed case-control studies in the literature.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, the Chinese Biological Medical Database and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Database were systematically searched to identify all case-control studies published through February 2 ...[more]