Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2010
Association of glutathione S-transferases polymorphisms (GSTM1 and GSTT1) with senile cataract: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sun Lei, Xi Bo, Yu Lei, Gao Xiang-Chun, Shi De-Jing, Yan Yin-Kun, Xu Dong-Jiang, Han Qing, Wang Chunyu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Glutathione S-transferase (GST) polymorphisms have been considered risk factors for the development of senile cataract. However, the results are not consistent. In this study, the authors conducted a meta-analysis to assess the association between GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes and the risk for senile cataract.
METHODS: Published literature from PubMed, EMBASE, and other databases were retrieved. All studies evaluating the association between GSTM1/GSTT1 polymorphisms and senile cataract were included. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects model.
RESULTS: Eleven studies on GSTM1 (1871 cases and 1267 controls) and five studies on GSTT1 (1180 cases, 706 controls) were included. Overall analysis showed that the association between GSTM1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is not statistically significant (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.99-1.94; P = 0.054) and that the association between GSTT1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is not significant (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36; P = 0.454). Subgroup analysis showed that the association between GSTM1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is statistically significant in Asians (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.03-2.67; P = 0.039) but not in Caucasians (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.74-1.96; P = 0.443). Similar results were observed for the association between GSTT1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract.
CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis suggested that GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes are associated with increased risk for senile cataract in Asian populations but not in Caucasian populations. Given the limited sample size, the finding on GST polymorphisms merits further investigation.
METHODS: Published literature from PubMed, EMBASE, and other databases were retrieved. All studies evaluating the association between GSTM1/GSTT1 polymorphisms and senile cataract were included. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects model.
RESULTS: Eleven studies on GSTM1 (1871 cases and 1267 controls) and five studies on GSTT1 (1180 cases, 706 controls) were included. Overall analysis showed that the association between GSTM1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is not statistically significant (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.99-1.94; P = 0.054) and that the association between GSTT1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is not significant (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36; P = 0.454). Subgroup analysis showed that the association between GSTM1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract is statistically significant in Asians (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.03-2.67; P = 0.039) but not in Caucasians (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.74-1.96; P = 0.443). Similar results were observed for the association between GSTT1 null genotype and risk for senile cataract.
CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis suggested that GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes are associated with increased risk for senile cataract in Asian populations but not in Caucasian populations. Given the limited sample size, the finding on GST polymorphisms merits further investigation.