Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Diabetes. Dec 15, 2022; 13(12): 1140-1153
Published online Dec 15, 2022. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1140
Published online Dec 15, 2022. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1140
Ref. | Population or ethnicity | Total sample size (DF vs T2DM without DF) vs controls | Genes | SNVs reported | Potential influences of the SNVs on DF and DF related complications | Genotypes as risk or protective factors |
Wang et al[17], 2020 | Chinese | 2995 (681 vs 1053 vs 1261) | CRP | rs11265260 | Risk factor of DFO | GG + AG/GG |
CRP | rs1800947 | Risk factor of DFO | GG + CG | |||
CRP | rs2794520 | Risk factor of DFO | TT + CT/TT | |||
CRP | rs1130864 | Risk factor of DFO | TT + CT/TT | |||
CRP | rs3093059 | Protective factor against DFO | CC+CT/CC | |||
Dhamodharan et al[23], 2015 | Indian | 515 (2701 vs 139 vs 106) | IL-6 | rs1800795 | Protective factor against T2DM but not against DFU-DN | GC, CC |
Erdogan et al[24], 2017 | Turkish | 204 (50 vs 35 vs 119) | IL-6 | rs1800795 | Risk factor of T2DM but not DFU | GG |
Viswanathan et al[25], 2018 | Indian | 270 (without controls) | IL-6 | rs1800795 | Risk factor of severe wound infections | GC + CC |
Dhamodharan et al[23], 2015 | Indian | 515 (2701 vs 139 vs 106) | TNF-α | rs1800629 | Risk factor of both T2DM and DFU-DN | GA, AA |
Viswanathan et al[25], 2018 | Indian | 270 (without controls) | TNF-α | rs1800629 | Risk factors of severe wound infections, ulcer grade of DF | GA + AA |
rs361525 | Risk factor of ulcer grade of DF | GA + AA | ||||
Dhamodharan et al[23], 2015 | Indian | 515 (2701 vs 139 vs 106) | SDF-1 | rs1801157 | Protective factor against T2DM and/or DFU-DN | GA, AA: T2DM; AA: DFU-DN |
Viswanathan et al[25], 2018 | Indian | 270 (without controls) | SDF-1 | rs1801157 | Risk factors of severe wound infections and major amputations (foot/leg) | GA + AA |
Amoli et al[34], 2011 | Iranian | 586 (247 vs 241 vs 98) | VEGF | rs699947 | Protective factor against DFU | AA |
Li et al[35], 2018 | Chinese | 288 (97 vs 88 vs 103) | VEGF | rs699947 | Protective factor against DFU | AC, AA |
Li[36], 2018 | Chinese | 229 (121 vs 108) (without healthy controls) | VEGF | rs2010963 | Protective factor against DFU | CC |
Teena et al[42], 2020 | Indian | 400 (100 vs 150 vs 150) | NRF2 | rs35652124 | Risk factors of DFU | TT |
Teena et al[43], 2021 | Indian | 400 (100 vs 150 vs 150) | NRF2 | rs182428269 | Protective factor against T2DM and DFU | CC, CT |
Risk factor of T2DM and DFU | TT | |||||
Peng et al[45], 2018 | Chinese | 438 (142 vs 148 vs 148) | SIRT1 | rs12778366 | Protective factor against T2DM and DF | Allele C carriers |
Cao et al[48], 2020 | Chinese | 430 (128 vs 147 vs 155) | ICAM1 | rs5498 | Protective factor against T2DM and DF | GG |
ICAM1 | rs3093030 | Protective factor against DF | CT + TT | |||
Li[36], 2018 | Chinese | 229 (121 vs 108) (without healthy controls) | MCP-1 | rs1024611 | Risk factor of DFU | GG |
Su et al[51], 2018 | Chinese | 400 (116 vs 135 vs 149) | MCP-1 | rs1024611 | Risk factor of DFU | AG, GG |
Sadati et al[53], 2018 | Iranian | 257 (123 vs 134) (without healthy controls) | eNOS | eNOS Glu298Asp | Protective factor against DFU | TT |
Erdogan et al[37], 2018 | Turkish | 182 (50 vs 57 vs 75) | eNOS | eNOS G894T | Risk factor of T2DM but not DFU | Not related to DFU onset |
Zubair and Ahmad[58], 2018 | Arabian | 150 (50 vs 50 vs 50) | HSP-70 | rs2227956 | Risk factor of DFU | TT |
Protective factor of DFU | CC | |||||
Pichu et al[60], 2015 | Indian | 224 (79 vs 79 vs 66) | HIF-1α | rs11549465 | Risk factor of DFU but not T2DM | CT |
Pichu et al[61], 2018 | Indian | 529 (199 vs 185 vs 145) | HIF-1α | rs11549467 | Risk factors of T2DM and DFU | GA |
Pichu et al[65], 2017 | Indian | 906 (301 vs 305 vs 300) | LOX | rs1800449 | Risk factor of DFU but not T2DM | AA |
Mrozikiewicz-Rakowska et al[66], 2017 | Polish | 670 (204 vs 299 vs 167) | ITLN1 | rs2274907 | Risk factor of DF but not T2DM | TT |
Meng et al[68], 2017 | Scottish | 3394 (699 vs 2695) | MAPK14 | rs80028505 | Risk factor of DFU | Not reported |
Wifi et al[71], 2017 | Egyptian | 90 (30 vs 30 vs 30) | TLRs | rs5743836 | Risk factor of DFU among T2DM patients | CT |
Singh et al[70], 2013 | Indian | 255 (125 vs 130) (DFU vs healthy controls) | TLRs | rs4986790 | Risk factor of DFU | AG/GG + AG |
TLRs | rs4986791 | Risk factor of DFU | TT/CT/CT + TT | |||
TLRs | rs11536858 | Risk factor of DFU | GG/AG/GG + AG | |||
TLRs | rs1927914 | Risk factor of DFU | CC | |||
TLRs | rs1927911 | Risk factor of DFU | CT/CT + TT | |||
Nehring et al[72], 2013 | Polish | 877 (122 vs 293 vs 462) | OPG | rs2073617 | Protective factor against DF among female patients | AG |
OPG | rs2073618 | Risk factor of DF among T2DM patients | CC | |||
Soroush et al[76], 2017 | Iranian | 212 (105 vs 107) (without healthy controls) | VDR | rs2228570 | Risk factor of DFU among T2DM patients | TT + CT |
Zhao et al[78], 2015 | Chinese | 300 (123 vs 97 vs 80) | FIB | rs6056 | Risk factor of DF | CT, TT |
- Citation: Hu YJ, Song CS, Jiang N. Single nucleotide variations in the development of diabetic foot ulcer: A narrative review. World J Diabetes 2022; 13(12): 1140-1153
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9358/full/v13/i12/1140.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1140