Association of the interleukin-10 1082G/A, 819C/T and 3575T/A gene polymorphisms with systemic sclerosis: a meta-analysis.
ABSTRACT Many environmental and genetic factors have been contributed to the development of systemic sclerosis (SSc). To determine whether IL-10 gene polymorphisms are associated with SSc, we conducted a meta-analysis approach. A total of eight studies involving 1,034 SSc cases and 1,815 controls were obtained by electronic database, i.e. Embase, Blackwell, Scopus, China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, Chinese Biomedical database, Google searching. We analyzed three gene polymorphisms, including IL-10 -1082G/A (rs1800896), IL-10 -819C/T (rs1800871), IL-10 -3575T/A (rs1800890). The combined odds ratio (OR) with its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated using fixed or random effect models. We found that IL-10 819C allele might contribute to SSc susceptibility by fixed effect model and IL-10 3575A allele could be an important risk factor for SSc, especially in European descent. No significant heterogeneity were observed. Under random effect model, there was no evidence of statistically significant association between IL-10 1082G/A polymorphism and SSc. Publication bias was absent in all analyses. However, larger scale primary studies are required to further evaluate the IL-10 polymorphism and SSc.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Interleukin-10 (IL10) is an anti-inflammatory cytokine which may modulate disease expression in multiple sclerosis (MS). Three dimorphic polymorphisms within the IL10 promoter region at positions - 1082, -819 and -519 have previously been identified. The - 1082*A allele has been associated with low and the - 1082*G allele with high in vitro IL10 production. We have genotyped 185 Caucasian MS patients and 211 ethnically matched controls for each of these three dimorphisms. MS patients were stratified for severity of disease outcome. No associations were found for any IL10 promoter polymorphisms when the MS cases were compared with controls or with disease outcome with regards to disability. IL10 polymorphism does not appear to be associated with MS or to influence disease progression.Journal of Neuroimmunology 12/1999; 101(2):207-10. · 3.03 Impact Factor
- Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 09/2002; 61(8):671-2. · 9.11 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Funnel plots (plots of effect estimates against sample size) may be useful to detect bias in meta-analyses that were later contradicted by large trials. We examined whether a simple test of asymmetry of funnel plots predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared to large trials, and we assessed the prevalence of bias in published meta-analyses. Medline search to identify pairs consisting of a meta-analysis and a single large trial (concordance of results was assumed if effects were in the same direction and the meta-analytic estimate was within 30% of the trial); analysis of funnel plots from 37 meta-analyses identified from a hand search of four leading general medicine journals 1993-6 and 38 meta-analyses from the second 1996 issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Degree of funnel plot asymmetry as measured by the intercept from regression of standard normal deviates against precision. In the eight pairs of meta-analysis and large trial that were identified (five from cardiovascular medicine, one from diabetic medicine, one from geriatric medicine, one from perinatal medicine) there were four concordant and four discordant pairs. In all cases discordance was due to meta-analyses showing larger effects. Funnel plot asymmetry was present in three out of four discordant pairs but in none of concordant pairs. In 14 (38%) journal meta-analyses and 5 (13%) Cochrane reviews, funnel plot asymmetry indicated that there was bias. A simple analysis of funnel plots provides a useful test for the likely presence of bias in meta-analyses, but as the capacity to detect bias will be limited when meta-analyses are based on a limited number of small trials the results from such analyses should be treated with considerable caution.BMJ 10/1997; 315(7109):629-34. · 14.09 Impact Factor