Association of <i>rs27044</i> and <i>rs30187</i> polymorphisms in <i>endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 1</i> gene and ankylosing spondylitis susceptibility: A meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The findings regarding association of endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 1 (ERAP1) gene polymorphisms and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) susceptibility are inconsistent. Our aim is to appraise and merge the existing evidence on the relationship of rs27044 and rs30187 polymorphisms in ERAP1 gene and susceptibility to AS. METHODS: Electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, and CNKI were retrieved for relevant publications. The search was conducted from inception to 10 June, 2019. Studies on the association of rs27044 and rs30187 polymorphisms and risk of AS were included. Quality evaluation was carried out using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated to appraise the associations under allelic and genotypic models. RESULTS: In total, 26 case-control studies with 31 cohorts containing 17 223 AS patients and 36 915 controls were eligible for this meta-analysis. According to NOS, each study received ≥ 5 scores. The pooled data indicated that rs27044 and rs30187 polymorphisms were significantly associated with AS susceptibility in the overall population: rs27044, G versus C, OR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.16-1.33, P<.001; rs30187, T versus C, OR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.33, P<.001. When stratified by ethnicity, rs27044 appeared to be significantly correlated with AS in both Asians and Caucasians. For rs30187, despite positive association being observed under the allelic model in both Asians and Caucasians, the findings of genotypic comparisons supported the association only existed in Caucasians but not Asians. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that rs27044 and rs30187 polymorphisms are significantly associated with increased risk of AS, especially in Caucasians.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".