MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4387888500 · doi:10.1186/s12885-023-11509-7

Toll-like receptor 9 (-1237 T/C, -1486 T/C) and the risk of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of genetic association studies

2023· review· en· W4387888500 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yap Zi Qyi, Htar Htar Aung, Saint-Nway Aye, Cho Naing

Notice bibliographique

RevueBMC Cancer · 2023
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueImmune Response and Inflammation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesInternational Medical University
Mots-clésMedicineOdds ratioMeta-analysisInternal medicineConfidence intervalCancerSurgical oncologyCase-control studyOncologyDemography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Gastric cancer has a complex aetiology including genetic factors. Individual case-control studies of toll like receptor (TLR) 9 (-1237 T/C, -1486 T/C) polymorphisms in the gastric cancer risk were available, and they showed variation in the findings. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to synthesize the evidence on the association between polymorphisms of TLR 9 (-1237 T/C, -1486 T/C) and the risk of gastric cancer using data from eligible studies. Methods This study followed the PRISMA 2020 Checklist. Studies were searched in health-related databases. The methodological quality of studies was evaluated with the use of Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria. The summary odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to determine the strength of association between each polymorphism and the risk of gastric cancer using five genetic models. Stratification was done by ethnic groups. For the robustness of the analysis, a leave-one-out meta-analysis was performed. Results Eight case-control studies with 3,644 participants (1914 cases, 1730 controls) were conducted across six countries. Half of the studies were conducted in China. In the NOS methodological quality assessment, only three studies received a high-quality rating (i.e., a score of ≥ 7). TLR 9 (-1486 T/C) polymorphism and the risk of gastric cancer were assessed in six studies, four of Asian ethnicity and two of non-Asian. Under the dominant model, only in the Asian ethnic group showed a marginally and significantly increased risk of gastric cancer (overall: OR = 1.22, 95%CI = 0.90–1.67, I 2 = 56%; Asian: OR = 1.24, 95%CI = 1.00-1.54, I 2 = 0%, non-Asian: OR = 1.25, 95%CI = 0.38–4.09, I 2 = 89%). Under the recessive model in the absence of heterogeneity, only the Asian group had a significantly higher risk of developing gastric cancer (overall: OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 0.74–2.64, I 2 = 85%; Asian: OR: 1.41, 95% CI = 1.07–1.86, I 2 = 0%, non-Asian: OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 0.12–11.76, I 2 = 97%). Under the heterozygous model, there was no significant association with the risk of gastric cancer overall or among any ethnic subgroup. Under the homozygous model in the absence of heterogeneity, only the Asian group had a significantly higher risk of gastric cancer (overall, OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.76–2.86, I 2 = 82%; Asian: OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.13–2.1, I 2 = 0%; non-Asian: OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.1-14.33, I 2 = 96%). Under the allele model, a significantly increased risk of gastric cancer was observed only in the Asian group (overall: OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 0.89–1.71, I 2 = 84%; Asian: OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.05–1.41, I 2 = 0%; non-Asian: OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.34–4.59, I 2 = 97%). Four studies investigated the association between TLR 9 (-1237 T/C) polymorphism and the risk of developing gastric cancer. Under any of the five genetic models, there was no association between TLR 9 (-1237 T/C) and the development of gastric cancer in overall or in any ethnic subgroup. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the effect was unstable. With a small number of studies with a small number of participants, we addressed the issue of insufficient power for drawing conclusions. Conclusions The findings suggested that TLR9 (-1486 T/C) may play a role in the risk of gastric cancer specific to the Asian ethnic group. To substantiate the findings on the association between these two polymorphisms (TLR9 -1237 T/C, -1486 T/C) and the risk of gastric cancer, future well-designed case-control studies with a sufficient number of participants in multi-ethnic groups are recommended.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: Méta-analyse
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,446
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,714

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,120
Tête enseignante GPT0,370
Écart entre enseignants0,250 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBMC CancerMême sujetImmune Response and InflammationTravaux en français237 207