Quantitative assessment of the effect of epidermal growth factor 61A/G polymorphism on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma

4Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The association between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the epidermal growth factor (EGF) 61A/G polymorphism has been analyzed in several studies, but results remain inconsistent. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to quantitatively summarize the association between the EGF 61A/G polymorphism and the risk of HCC. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published prior to May 1, 2014. The overall, subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 2.2. In total, 12 published case-control studies, consisting of 2,095 patients with HCC and 3,766 control individuals, were included in the present study. Meta-analysis of the included studies revealed that EGF 61A/G polymorphism contributed to the risk of HCC under all four genetic models, consisting of the G vs. A (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.40), GG vs. AA (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.26-1.85), GG vs. AG + AA (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.13-1.58) and GG + AG vs. AA (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.08-1.49) comparisons. Subgroup analysis further suggested that EGF 61A/G polymorphism was associated with the risk of HCC in patients and control individuals with liver disease, based on ethnicity and source of control, respectively. No other significance in residual subgroup analysis was observed. The present meta-analysis suggests that the EGF 61A/G polymorphism is associated with an increased risk of HCC and may be a potential marker for liver disease, such as hepatitis B virus infection, hepatitis C virus infection and liver cirrhosis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shen, X. F., Zeng, X. T., Jian, Z. Y., Zhou, M., Zhou, P., & Zhang, M. (2015). Quantitative assessment of the effect of epidermal growth factor 61A/G polymorphism on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncology Letters, 10(5), 3199–3205. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2015.3723

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free