The Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein-1 (LMP1) 30-bp deletion and XhoI-polymorphism in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is considered to be closely associated with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), in which EBV-encoded latent membrane protein 1 (LMP1) was found to have an oncogenic role. However, the results published on the LMP1 polymorphism are inconsistent. In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the frequency of the associations and a more precise association between NPC and EBV LMP1 gene variants (30-bp deletion (del)/XhoI-loss). METHODS: Eligible articles met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were identified in the following electronic databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, and SciELO. Consequently, the data of interest were extracted and plotted in a table to calculate the frequency and odds ratio (OR) of the outcomes of interest (30-bp del-LMP1/XhoI-loss) in patients with NPC. Study quality (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)), publication bias, and heterogeneity were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-one observational studies were included with a total of 2,846 individuals (NPC, n = 1,855; control, n = 991). The risk of bias in relation to study quality evaluated by NOS was considered low. The pooled estimate of the frequency of 30-bp del-LMP1 and XhoI-loss in patients with NPC was 77% (95% confidence interval (CI): 72 to 82) and 82% (95% CI: 71 to 92), respectively. There was an association between 30-bp del-LMP1 and NPC susceptibility (OR = 2.86, 95% CI: 1.35 to 6.07, P = 0.00). Similarly, there was an association between XhoI-loss and NPC (OR = 8.5, 95% CI: 1.7 to 41, P = 0.00). However, when we analyze the co-existence of the 30-bp del-LMP1 and XhoI-loss in patients with NPC, there was no association (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.06 to 18.79, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an association between the 30-bp del-LMP1 and XhoI-loss with NPC susceptibility. However, our data should be interpreted with caution because the sample size was small, and there was heterogeneity between the studies. Thus, future studies are needed with adjusted estimates to simultaneously evaluate multiple factors involved in the development of NPC. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014013496 .
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 | 0.017 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".