Relationship Between Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Insertion/Deletion Gene Polymorphism and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus/Lupus Nephritis: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Results from studies of the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) insertion/deletion (I/D) gene polymorphism and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)/lupus nephritis (LN) are controversial. We performed this metaanalysis to evaluate the relationship between ACE I/D gene polymorphism and SLE/LN and to explore whether the ACE D allele or DD genotype could become a predictive marker for risk of SLE/LN. METHODS: Association studies were identified from the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CBM-disc (China Biological Medicine Database) as of May 1, 2011, and eligible investigations were synthesized using a metaanalysis method. Results were expressed with OR for dichotomous data, and 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: Sixteen investigations were identified for the analysis of association between ACE I/D gene polymorphism and SLE, consisting of 1959 patients with SLE and 2078 controls. In the overall populations, there was a marked association between D allele or DD genotype and SLE susceptibility (D: OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04-1.58, p = 0.02; DD: OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17-2.19, p = 0.003), and DD homozygous was associated with LN risk (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.26-6.11, p = 0.01). In the subgroup analysis, DD genotype associated with SLE risk was observed in Asians; no other association was found in Asians, whites, Africans, and Brazilians. CONCLUSION: D allele and DD homozygous are significant genetic molecular markers to predict SLE susceptibility, and DD genotype is a valuable marker to predict the LN risk. More investigations are required to clarify the association of the D allele or DD homozygous with SLE/LN susceptibility.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".