These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Lack of any association of GST genetic polymorphisms with susceptibility to ovarian cancer--a meta-analysis.
    Author: Han LY, Liu K, Lin XL, Zou BB, Zhao JS.
    Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(15):6131-6. PubMed ID: 25124586.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Epidemiology studies have reported conflicting results between glutathione S-transferase Mu-1 (GSTM1), glutathione S-transferase theta-1 (GSTT1) and glutathione S-transferase pi-1 (GSTP1) and ovarian cancer (OC) susceptibility. In this study, an updated meta-analysis was applied to determine whether the deletion of GSTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1 has an influence on OC susceptibility. METHODS: A published literature search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index Expanded database for articles published in English. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated using random or fixed effects models. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the Cochrane Q test and I2 statistics. Sub-group analysis was conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was employed to evaluate the respective influence of each study on the overall estimate. RESULTS: In total, 10 published studies were included in the final analysis. The combined analysis revealed that there was no significant association between GSTM1 null genotype and OC risk (OR=1.01, 95%CI: 0.91-1.12). Additionally, there was no significant association between GSTT1 genetic polymorphisms and OC risk (OR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.85-1.13). Similalry, no significant associations were found concerning the GSTP1 rs1695 locus and OC risk. Meanwhile, subgroup analysis did not show a significant increase in eligible studies with low heterogeneity. However, sensitivity analysis, publication bias and cumulative analysis demonstrated the reliability and stability of the current meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that GSTs genetic polymorphisms may not contribute to OC susceptibility. Large epidemiological studies with the combination of GSTM1 null, GSTT1 null and GSTP1 Ile105Val polymorphisms and more specific histological subtypes of OC are needed to prove our findings.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]