TGF-β1 -509C/T 多态性与瘢痕疙瘩病的易感性:系统回顾与荟萃分析。

Scars, burns & healing Pub Date : 2017-05-29 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2059513117709943
Yiji Tu, William Charles Lineaweaver, Feng Zhang
{"title":"TGF-β1 -509C/T 多态性与瘢痕疙瘩病的易感性:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Yiji Tu, William Charles Lineaweaver, Feng Zhang","doi":"10.1177/2059513117709943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Keloid disease (KD) is common and often refractory to treatment. Definition of the genetic mechanisms of KD can lead to a better understanding of the disease and suggest more effective treatment strategies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To quantitatively estimate the association between KD susceptibility and the -509C/T polymorphism in the TGF-β1 gene.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase and CNKI databases were searched using a combination of the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and relevant words in titles. Analyses were performed with STATA 12.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five case-control studies encompassing a total of 564 keloid cases and 620 healthy controls were pooled in the final meta-analysis. Among the five studies, no significant association was detected between the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism and KD under all of the five genetic models (allele comparison, heterozygote comparison, homozygote comparison, dominant model and recessive model) for the overall analyses and for the subgroup analyses based on DNA extraction method, participant ethnicity and group size. When stratified by study quality, three high-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison and homozygote model (C versus T: OR = 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65-0.98, <i>P</i> = 0.03; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.64; CC versus TT: OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.41-0.94, <i>P</i> = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.79); while two moderate-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison, homozygote model and recessive model (C versus T: OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.15-2.01, <i>P</i> = 0.004; I<sup>2</sup> = 39%, <i>P</i> = 0.20; CC versus TT: OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.24-3.70, <i>P</i> = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 19%, <i>P</i> = 0.27; CC versus CT+TT: OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.29-3.24, <i>P</i> = 0.002; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.35).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The current meta-analysis suggests that the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism is not associated with KD susceptibility. High-quality and large-scale studies are needed to validate our findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":21495,"journal":{"name":"Scars, burns & healing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6c/65/10.1177_2059513117709943.PMC5965324.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism and susceptibility to keloid disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yiji Tu, William Charles Lineaweaver, Feng Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2059513117709943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Keloid disease (KD) is common and often refractory to treatment. Definition of the genetic mechanisms of KD can lead to a better understanding of the disease and suggest more effective treatment strategies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To quantitatively estimate the association between KD susceptibility and the -509C/T polymorphism in the TGF-β1 gene.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase and CNKI databases were searched using a combination of the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and relevant words in titles. Analyses were performed with STATA 12.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five case-control studies encompassing a total of 564 keloid cases and 620 healthy controls were pooled in the final meta-analysis. Among the five studies, no significant association was detected between the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism and KD under all of the five genetic models (allele comparison, heterozygote comparison, homozygote comparison, dominant model and recessive model) for the overall analyses and for the subgroup analyses based on DNA extraction method, participant ethnicity and group size. When stratified by study quality, three high-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison and homozygote model (C versus T: OR = 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65-0.98, <i>P</i> = 0.03; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.64; CC versus TT: OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.41-0.94, <i>P</i> = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.79); while two moderate-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison, homozygote model and recessive model (C versus T: OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.15-2.01, <i>P</i> = 0.004; I<sup>2</sup> = 39%, <i>P</i> = 0.20; CC versus TT: OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.24-3.70, <i>P</i> = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 19%, <i>P</i> = 0.27; CC versus CT+TT: OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.29-3.24, <i>P</i> = 0.002; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.35).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The current meta-analysis suggests that the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism is not associated with KD susceptibility. High-quality and large-scale studies are needed to validate our findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scars, burns & healing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6c/65/10.1177_2059513117709943.PMC5965324.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scars, burns & healing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2059513117709943\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scars, burns & healing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2059513117709943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:瘢痕疙瘩病(KD)是一种常见病,通常难治。明确瘢痕疙瘩病的遗传机制有助于更好地了解该病,并提出更有效的治疗策略:定量评估 KD 易感性与 TGF-β1 基因中 -509C/T 多态性之间的关联:方法:使用医学主题词表(MeSH)和标题中的相关词对 PubMed、Embase 和 CNKI 数据库进行检索。使用 STATA 12.0 进行分析:最终的荟萃分析汇总了五项病例对照研究,共包括 564 例瘢痕疙瘩病例和 620 例健康对照。在这五项研究中,无论是总体分析还是基于 DNA 提取方法、参与者种族和群体大小的亚组分析,在所有五种遗传模型(等位基因比较、杂合子比较、同基因比较、显性模型和隐性模型)下,均未发现 TGF-β1 -509C/T 多态性与瘢痕疙瘩之间存在明显关联。按研究质量分层时,三项高质量研究在等位基因比较和同源模式下显示出显著相关性(C 对 T:OR = 0.80,95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.65-0.98,P = 0.03;I2 = 0%,P = 0.64;CC 对 TT:OR = 0.62,95% CI = 0.41-0.94,P = 0.02;I2 = 0%,P = 0.79);而两项中等质量的研究显示,在等位基因比较、同基因模型和隐性模型下,两者有显著关联(C 对 T:OR = 1.52,95% CI = 1.15-2.01,P = 0.004;I2 = 39%,P = 0.20;CC 对 TT:OR = 2.14,95% CI = 1.24-3.70,P = 0.02;I2 = 19%,P = 0.27;CC 对 CT+TT:OR = 2.04,95% CI = 1.29-3.24,P = 0.002;I2 = 0%,P = 0.35).结论:目前的荟萃分析表明,TGF-β1 -509C/T多态性与KD易感性无关。需要进行高质量的大规模研究来验证我们的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism and susceptibility to keloid disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Keloid disease (KD) is common and often refractory to treatment. Definition of the genetic mechanisms of KD can lead to a better understanding of the disease and suggest more effective treatment strategies.

Objectives: To quantitatively estimate the association between KD susceptibility and the -509C/T polymorphism in the TGF-β1 gene.

Methods: PubMed, Embase and CNKI databases were searched using a combination of the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and relevant words in titles. Analyses were performed with STATA 12.0.

Results: Five case-control studies encompassing a total of 564 keloid cases and 620 healthy controls were pooled in the final meta-analysis. Among the five studies, no significant association was detected between the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism and KD under all of the five genetic models (allele comparison, heterozygote comparison, homozygote comparison, dominant model and recessive model) for the overall analyses and for the subgroup analyses based on DNA extraction method, participant ethnicity and group size. When stratified by study quality, three high-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison and homozygote model (C versus T: OR = 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65-0.98, P = 0.03; I2 = 0%, P = 0.64; CC versus TT: OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.41-0.94, P = 0.02; I2 = 0%, P = 0.79); while two moderate-quality studies showed significant association under allele comparison, homozygote model and recessive model (C versus T: OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.15-2.01, P = 0.004; I2 = 39%, P = 0.20; CC versus TT: OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.24-3.70, P = 0.02; I2 = 19%, P = 0.27; CC versus CT+TT: OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.29-3.24, P = 0.002; I2 = 0%, P = 0.35).

Conclusions: The current meta-analysis suggests that the TGF-β1 -509C/T polymorphism is not associated with KD susceptibility. High-quality and large-scale studies are needed to validate our findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of oral Calendula officinalis on second-degree burn wound healing. To bleed or not to bleed? Case series and discussion of haemorrhage risk with enzymatic debridement in burn injuries. An evaluation of clinical psychology input into burns multidisciplinary follow-up clinics. The efficacy of combined ultrasound and electric field stimulation therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Protocol for clinical diagnosis and empiric treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis in severely burned patients: observations and literature review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1