Table_2_Association Between Aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 Polymorphisms and Risk of Alzheimer's Disease and Parkinson's Disease: A Meta-Analysis Based on 5,315 Individuals.docx
Objective: A number of studies have reported that aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 (ALDH2) polymorphisms maybe associated with the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the results of such studies are inconsistent. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis to clarify the association between ALDH2 polymorphisms and the risk of AD and PD.
Methods: Five online databases were searched and the relevant studies were reviewed from inception through May 10, 2018. Odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in each genetic model of the general population and various subgroups. Furthermore, we simultaneously performed heterogeneity, cumulative, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses.
Results: Overall, nine case-control studies involving 5,315 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Potential associations were found between the ALDH2 rs671 G>A polymorphism and the risk of AD (A vs. G: OR = 1.46, 95%CI = 1.01–2.11, P = 0.05, I2 = 84.2%; AA vs. GG: OR = 2.22, 95%CI = 1.03–4.77, P = 0.04, I2 = 79.2%; AA vs. GG+GA: OR = 1.94, 95%CI = 1.03–3.64, P =0.04, I2 = 71.1%). In addition, some similar results were observed in other subgroups. Moreover, no significant association between ALDH2 polymorphisms and PD risk.
Conclusions: In conclusion, our meta-analysis indicated that the ALDH2 rs671 G>A polymorphism plays an important role in AD development.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuron.2009.03.024
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-3-319-67144-4_25
- https://doi.org//10.2174/1566523218666180119120726
- https://doi.org//10.1212/WNL.0b013e31828726f5
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nj7526-299a
- https://doi.org//10.3390/ijms19061637
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jalz.2013.12.025
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.07.009
- https://doi.org//10.1155/2018/4784268
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32399-6
- https://doi.org//10.1136/jnnp-2015-310548
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s13073-018-0551-4
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fmed.2018.00108
- https://doi.org//10.1006/bbrc.2000.2923
- https://doi.org//10.1136/bmj.b2535
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s12017-015-8365-7
- https://doi.org//10.1037/1082-989X.11.2.193
- https://doi.org//10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960630)15:12<1253::AID-SIM303>3.0.CO;2-R
- https://doi.org//10.2307/2533446
- https://doi.org//10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0197-4580(03)00114-3
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jns.2007.12.006
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neulet.2009.11.022
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00702-013-1112-z
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2015.06.001
- https://doi.org//10.4238/gmr.15038606
- https://doi.org//10.4238/gmr.15048740
- https://doi.org//10.1089/gtmb.2016.0133
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69113-7
- https://doi.org//10.4103/jnrp.jnrp_337_17
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00702-013-1006-0
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-94-007-5881-0_8
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.numecd.2016.03.007
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fnagi.2018.00081
- https://doi.org//10.1186/1479-7364-3-2-121
- https://doi.org//10.1038/srep25360
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF00197271
- https://doi.org//10.1093/carcin/bgu244
- https://doi.org//10.3390/ijerph14020165
- https://doi.org//10.1111/jcmm.13443
- https://doi.org//10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.013204
CC BY 4.0