Cargando…

Analysis of the association between the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism and ovarian cancer risk

INTRODUCTION: Results conflict on the association between the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism and ovarian cancer risk, despite wide-ranging investigations. This meta-analysis examines whether the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism is associated with ovarian cancer risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eligible case-co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yuan, Cunzhong, Liu, Xiaoyan, Li, Rongrong, Yan, Shi, Kong, Beihua
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7212224/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32399118
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2020.94657
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Results conflict on the association between the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism and ovarian cancer risk, despite wide-ranging investigations. This meta-analysis examines whether the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism is associated with ovarian cancer risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eligible case-control studies were searched in PubMed. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of 5,802 ovarian cancer cases and 9,390 controls from 7 articles published. The strength of association between XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism and ovarian cancer susceptibility was calculated using pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: No statistically significant associations between XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism and ovarian cancer risk were found in any genetic models. However, a significant relationship with ovarian cancer risk was discovered when the high quality studies were pooled in the meta-analysis (AA vs. GG: OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37–0.94, p = 0.03; GA vs. GG: OR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.78–0.96, p = 0.009; GA + AA vs. GG: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.77–0.94, p = 0.003; AA vs. GG + GA: OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.38–0.95, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that the XRCC2 rs3218536 polymorphism was associated with ovarian cancer risk overall for high quality studies. Non-Caucasian groups and high quality studies should be further studied.