Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 28, 2014; 20(44): 16765-16773
Published online Nov 28, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i44.16765
Published online Nov 28, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i44.16765
Study group | Co-dominant model | Dominant model | Recessive model | Additive model | |||||||||||
Lys/Gln vs Lys/Lys | Gln/Gln vs Lys/Lys | Gln/Gln+LysGln vs Lys/Lys | Gln/Gln vs Lys/Gln+Lys/Lys | (2Gln/Gln+Lys/Gln) vs 2(Lys/Gln+Gln/Gln+Lys/Lys) | |||||||||||
OR (95%CI) | P | Ph | OR (95%CI) | P | Ph | OR (95%CI) | P | Ph | OR (95%CI) | P | Ph | OR (95%CI) | P | Ph | |
Total | 1.11 (0.94, 1.31) | 0.20 | 0.01 | 1.31 (0.98, 1.75) | 0.07 | 0.03 | 1.14 (0.96, 1.35) | 0.14 | 0.001 | 1.21 (1.02, 1.43) | 0.03 | 0.11 | 1.10 (0.99, 1.22) | 0.10 | 0.02 |
Cancer type | |||||||||||||||
ESCC | 1.13 (0.89, 1.42) | 0.31 | 0.03 | 1.44 (1.01, 2.06) | 0.05 | 0.06 | 1.16 (0.91, 1.49) | 0.23 | 0.01 | 1.26 (0.90, 1.77) | 0.17 | 0.08 | 1.13 (0.94, 1.36) | 0.21 | 0.02 |
EADC | 1.09 (0.85, 1.40) | 0.51 | 0.02 | 1.26 (1.02, 1.56) | 0.03 | 0.05 | 1.11 (0.85, 1.44) | 0.45 | 0.01 | 1.19 (0.98, 1.45) | 0.08 | 0.25 | 1.07 (0.98, 1.18) | 0.13 | 0.22 |
Ethnicity | |||||||||||||||
Chinese | 1.10 (0.82, 1.47) | 0.53 | 0.02 | 2.49 (1.44, 4.29) | 0.001 | 0.64 | 1.18 (0.88, 1.60) | 0.27 | 0.01 | 2.37 (1.38, 4.10) | 0.002 | 0.65 | 1.21 (0.94, 1.56) | 0.15 | 0.02 |
Non-Chinese | 1.12 (0.91, 1.38) | 0.30 | 0.03 | 1.13 (0.82, 1.56) | 0.45 | 0.02 | 1.11 (0.89, 1.39) | 0.35 | 0.01 | 1.12 (0.93, 1.34) | 0.23 | 0.14 | 1.06 (0.98, 1.15) | 0.16 | 0.27 |
- Citation: Yang R, Zhang C, Malik A, Shen ZD, Hu J, Wu YH. Xeroderma pigmentosum group D polymorphisms and esophageal cancer susceptibility: A meta-analysis based on case-control studies. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20(44): 16765-16773
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v20/i44/16765.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i44.16765