A meta-analysis of evidences on XPC polymorphisms and lung cancer susceptibility

作者：Liu Chuan; Yin Qinghua; Hu Jianbing; Li Lian; Zhang Yingyi; Wang Yajie^*

来源：Tumor Biology, 2013, 34(2): 1205-1213.

DOI：10.1007/s13277-013-0663-9

• Meta-analysis
• XPC
• Polymorphism
• Lung cancer

Published data regarding the association between the XPC polymorphisms and lung cancer susceptibility remained controversial. This meta-analysis was performed to draw a precise estimation of the relationship. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Elsevier, and Web of Science with a time limit of September 10, 2012. Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % CIs were used to assess the strength of association between these polymorphisms and lung cancer susceptibility using random-effects model. This meta-analysis including 13 case-control studies evaluated the associations between three commonly XPC polymorphisms (Lys939Gln, Ala499Val, and PAT(-/+)) and lung cancer susceptibility. No significant associations were found between the three XPC polymorphisms and lung cancer susceptibility (for Lys939Gln polymorphism: CC vs AA, OR = 1.191, p = 0.033; AC vs AA, OR = 0.992, p = 0.762, the dominant model, OR = 1.028, p = 0.521; the recessive model, OR = 1.205, p = 0.022). For Ala499Val polymorphism: TT vs CC, OR = 1.195, p = 0.071; TC vs CC, OR = 1.146, p = 0.133; the dominant model, OR = 1.161, p = 0.086; the recessive model, OR = 1.123, p = 0.156. For PAT(-/+) polymorphism: +/+ vs -/-, OR = 1.094, p = 0.539; +/- vs -/-, OR = 0.925, p = 0.313; the dominant model, OR = 0.969, p = 0.725; the recessive model, OR = 1.135, p = 0.290. p = 0.004 for Bonferroni testing). Significant associations were also not found in the subgroup analysis for the three XPC polymorphisms. This meta-analysis suggested that the three XPC polymorphisms might not be risk factors for developing lung cancer.

• 出版日期2013-4
• 单位中国人民解放军第二军医大学