4.3 Article

Two common functional catalase gene polymorphisms (rs1001179 and rs794316) and cancer susceptibility: evidence from 14,942 cancer cases and 43,285 controls

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 7, Issue 39, Pages 62954-62965

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.10617

Keywords

catalase; polymorphism; cancer; susceptibility; meta-analysis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation, China [81471670, 81274136]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2015T81037]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China [2014qngz-04]
  4. specialized Research Fund of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, China [RC (GG) 201203]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent studies have focused on the associations of catalase polymorphisms with various types of cancer, including cervical and prostate cancers. However, the results were inconsistent. To obtain a more reliable conclusion, we evaluated the relationship between the two common catalase gene polymorphisms (rs1001179 and rs794316) and cancer risk by a meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis included 37 published studies involving 14,942 cancer patients and 43,285 cancer-free controls. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the cancer risk. The results demonstrated that the rs1001179 polymorphism was associated with an increased cancer risk in the recessive and homozygote models (TT vs. CC: OR = 1.19, P = 0.01; TT vs. CT+CC: OR = 1.19, P < 0.001). Furthermore, stratified analyses revealed a significant association between the rs1001179 polymorphism and prostate cancer in all models except the homozygote comparison. An association of the rs794316 polymorphism with cancer risk was detected in two genetic models (TT vs. AA: OR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.03-1.74, P < 0.001; TT vs. AT+AA: OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.09-1.77, P = 0.01). Additional well-designed studies with large samples should be performed to validate our results.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available