Excision repair cross complementation group 1 polymorphisms and.pdfVIP

Chinese Medical Journal 2011;124(14):2203-2208 2203 Meta analysis Excision repair cross complementation group 1 polymorphisms and lung cancer risk: a meta-analysis CAO Chao, ZHANG Yan-mei, WANG Ran, SUN Shi-fang, CHEN Zhong-bo, MA Hong-ying, YU Yi-ming, DING Qun-li, SHU Li-hua and DENG Zai-chun Keywords: excision repair cross complementation group 1; polymorphism; lung cancer; susceptibility; meta-analysis Background Several studies have evaluated the association between polymorphisms of encoding excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) enzyme and lung cancer risk in diverse populations but with conflicting results. By pooling the relatively small samples in each study, it is possible to perform a meta-analysis of the evidence by rigorous methods. Methods Embase, Ovid, Medline and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched. Additional studies were identified from references in original studies or review articles. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed systematically, and the reported data were aggregated using the statistical techniques of meta-analysis. Results We found 3810 cases with lung cancer and 4332 controls from seven eligible studies. T19007C polymorphism showed no significant effect on lung cancer risk (C allele vs. T allele: odds ratio (OR)=0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.80–1.04; CC vs. TT: OR=0.76, 95% CI=0.56–1.02; CC vs. (CT+TT): OR=0.96, 95% CI=0.84–1.10). Similarly, there was no significant main effects for T19007C polymorphism on lung cancer risk when stratified analyses by ethnicity (Chinese or Caucasian). No significant association was found between C8092A polymorphism (3060 patients and 2729 controls) and the risk of lung cancer (A allele vs. C allele: OR=1.03, 95% CI=0.95–1.11; AA vs. CC: OR=1.08, 95% CI=0.88–1.33; AA vs. (AC+CC): OR=1.08, 95% CI=0.88–1.31). Conclusion We found little evidence of an association between the T1900C or C8092A polymorphisms of ERCC 1