MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record 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 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yap Zi Qyi, Htar Htar Aung, Saint-Nway Aye, Cho Naing

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Medical University
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioMeta-analysisInternal medicineConfidence intervalCancerSurgical oncologyCase-control studyOncologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207