4.7 Review

A meta-analysis of the bradykinin B2 receptor gene-58C/T polymorphism with hypertension

期刊

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 411, 期 5-6, 页码 324-328

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2009.12.015

关键词

Bradykinin B2 receptor; Polymorphism; Hypertension; Meta-analysis

资金

  1. Shanghai Chen Guang [09CG12]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai [09ZR1426200]
  3. Science Fund of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine [09XJ21019]
  4. National Science Foundation for Young Scientists of China [30900808]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objective: Numerous studies have attempted to associate -58CIT polymorphism of bradykinin B2 receptor gene (BDKRB2) with hypertension, whereas results were often irreproducible. We performed a meta-analysis aiming to provide a comprehensive evaluation of this polymorphism and hypertension. Methods: Case-control reports published in English were searched totaling four studies with six populations (823 cases and 916 controls). Random-effects model was applied irrespective of between-study heterogeneity, and study quality was assessed in duplicate. Results: Compared with -58C allele carriers, those with -58T allele had a lower yet nonsignificant risk for hypertension (OR = 0.86: 95% CI: 0.68-1.09; P=0.21). Lack of significance persisted after combining those with genotypes -58TC and -58TT together (OR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.67-1.09; P=0.21) or with -58TC and -58CC together (OR=0.75: 95% CI: 0.48-1.18; P=0.22) in association with hypertension. Sensitivity analyses by race indicated that comparison of -58T versus -58C generated a protective effect for hypertension in Asians (OR=0.77; 95% CI: C1.58-1.02: P=0.07) and African-Americans (OR=0.65; 95% CI: 0.43-0.98: P=0.04), but a risk effect in Caucasians (OR=1.22;95% CI: 0.92-1.61: P=0.17). No publication bias was observed. Conclusions: Our results suggested that -58T allele exhibited a protective effect on hypertension in Asians and African-Americans, yet a risk effect in Caucasians. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据