4.5 Review

Association of WDR36 polymorphisms with primary open angle glaucoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 96, Issue 26, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007291

Keywords

genetics; glaucoma; meta-analysis; POAG; WDR36

Funding

  1. Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Committee, China [GJHZ20160229170608241]
  2. Medical Scientific and Technology Research Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [A2014518]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background:The association of the WDR36 gene with glaucoma has been controversial in the literature. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association of all reported common polymorphisms in WDR36 with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) and its subtypes: high tension glaucoma (HTG) and normal tension glaucoma (NTG).Methods:Publications in PUBMED and EMBASE databases up to March 9, 2016 were searched for case-control association studies of WDR36 with POAG, HTG, and/or NTG. Reported studies giving adequate genotype and/or allele information were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of individual polymorphisms were estimated using the allelic model.Results:Our literature search yielded 122 records, among which 5 studies were eligible for meta-analysis, involving a total of 1352 POAG patients and 894 controls. Five WDR36 polymorphisms were meta-analyzed, rs11241095, rs10038177, rs17553936, rs13186912, and rs13153937. However, none of them was significantly associated with POAG, HTG, or NTG. The most-investigated polymorphisms, rs11241095 and rs10038177, had a pooled-OR of 1.09 (95% CI: 0.94-1.28, P=.25, I-2=0) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.71-1.39, P=.97, I-2=77%), respectively, for POAG.Conclusion:The existing data in the literature do not support a significant role of WDR36 in the genetic susceptibility of POAG or its subtypes. Further replication studies in specific populations are warranted.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available