4.6 Review

Association of Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-Type 1 (-675 4G/5G) Polymorphism with Pre-Eclampsia: Systematic Review

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056907

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Academic Clinical Fellowship funding scheme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Aims: Excessive generation of plasminogen activator inhibitor-type 1 (PAI-1) is implicated in the pathogenesis of pre-eclampsia and related conditions. The PAI-1 (2675 4G/5G) promoter polymorphism (rs1799889) affects transcriptional activity and is a putative genetic risk factor for pre-eclampsia. The aim of this study was identify, appraise and synthesise the available evidence for the association of the PAI-1 (2675 4G/5G) polymorphism with pre-eclampsia. Methods: Systematic review and random effects meta-analysis of genetic association studies. Results: We found 12 eligible genetic association studies in which a total of 1511 women with pre-eclampsia, eclampsia or HELLP syndrome and 3492 controls participated. The studies were generally small (median number of cases 102, range 24 to 403) and underpowered to detect plausible association sizes. Meta-analysis of all of the studies detected statistically significant gene-disease associations in the recessive [pooled odds ratio 1.28 (95% confidence interval 1.09, 1.50); population attributable risk 7.7%] and dominant [pooled odds ratio 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.01, 1.44); population attributable risk 13.7%] models. We did not find evidence of statistical heterogeneity, funnel plot asymmetry or small study bias. Conclusions: These data suggest that the fibrinolytic pathway regulated by the PAI-1 gene may contribute to the pathogenesis of pre-eclampsia and related conditions. This association, if confirmed in larger genetic association studies, may inform research efforts to develop novel interventions or help to prioritise therapeutic targets that merit evaluation in randomised clinical trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available