Vivin 231G.C polymorphism in case and control groups.First author [Ref]Year Country Cancer typeSNPCase Total G 78 CControl GG GC CC MAF Total G 38 38 0.59 67 362 220 268 220 711 132 250 57 90 C 44 GG GC CC MAF 31 28 8 0.33 0.44 0.51 0.53 0.P value of HWE testCheng et al [21] Gazouli et al [22] Yang et al-1 [25] Yang et al-2 [37] Zhu et al [28] Huang et al [30] Antonacopoulou et al [29] Upadhyay et al [36] Borges Bdo et al [24]2008 China 2009 Greece 2009 China 2009 China 2009 China 2010 China 2010 Greece 2011 India 2011 BrazilGastric cancer Colorectal cancer Gastric 11967625 cancer231G.C 96 231G.C 312 231G.C1140.67 0.11 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.43 0.18 0.09 0.267 357 68 202 238 46 218 224 55 202 238131 113 0.57 110 64 108 58 110 64 0.54 0.51 0.409 315 123 163 76 216 224 47 250 286 63 216 224 47 122 51 124 81 122Esophageal cancer 231G.C 221 Gastric cancer Colorectal cancer Colorectal cancer 231G.C 220 231G.C 702 231G.C590 814 144 302 256 0.58 210 116 63 302 198 96 58 36 20 84 16 0.36 0.40 0.705 717 180 345 186 0.50 182 82 66 50 16 0.31 0.33 0.Esophageal cancer 231G.C 250 Gastric cancer 231G.C110 44 18333 167 105 123 22 70 44 21 28Ref = reference; SNP = single nucleotide polymorphism; MAF = minor allele frequency; HWE = Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054081.tgenetic models (allele model: OR = 1.31, 95 CI: 1.10?.57, P = 0.003; dominant model: OR = 1.30, 95 CI: 1.05?.61, P = 0.017; recessive model: OR = 1.54, 95 CI: 1.17?.03, P = 0.002; homozygous model: OR = 1.66, 95 CI: 1.18?.33, P = 0.003; heterozygous model: OR = 1.46, 95 CI: 1.12?.89, P = 0.005) (order I-BRD9 Licochalcone A manufacturer Figure 2). In the stratified analysis by cancer types, significant associations were observed between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and increased risk of colorectal cancer under all genetic models (allele model: OR = 1.45, 95 CI: 1.20?.75, P,0.001; dominant model:OR = 1.51, 95 CI: 1.22?.88, P,0.001; recessive model: OR = 1.58, 95 CI: 1.08?.32, P = 0.020; homozygous model: OR = 1.84, 95 CI: 1.20?.82, P = 0.006). Furthermore, we also found significant connections between the CC genotype of survivin 231G.C polymorphism and increased risk of gastric cancer under the recessive and heterozygous genetic models (OR = 1.75, 95 CI: 1.07?.86, P = 0.026; OR = 1.59, 95 CI: 1.14?.22, P = 0.006; respectively) (Figure 3). However, there was only two studies referred to esophageal cancer susceptibility, which were conducted in India and China [36,37], respectively. In addition,Figure 2. Forest plot of ORs with a random-effects model for associations between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and gastrointestinal tract cancer risk under dominant model (CC+GC vs. GG). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054081.gTable 3. Meta-analysis of the association between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and gastrointestinal tract cancer risk.CC+GC vs. GG (Dominant model) CC vs. GG+GC (Recessive model) CC vs. GG (Homozygous model) CC vs. GC (Heterozygous model)SubgroupsC vs. G (Allele model)OR95 CIPOR 95 CI OR 95 CI OR 95 CI ORPhPPhPPhPPh95 CIPPhCancer types 0.121{ 0.002 0.115 0.041 1.06 0.81?.38 0.696 0.421 1.32 0.50?.50 0.571{ 0.004 1.32 0.51?.46 1.51 1.22?.88 ,0.001 0.282 1.58 1.08?.32 0.020{ 0.048 1.84 1.20?.82 0.006{ 0.568{ 1.27 0.75?.15 0.017 1.75 1.07?.86 0.053 1.86 0.90?.83 ,0.001{ 0.673{ 0.384{ 0.026{ 0.094{ 0.009 0.067 0.012 1.59 1.38 1.33 1.14?.22 0.006{ 0.90?.14 0.144{ 0.50?.54 0.568{ 0.309 0.035 0.Gastric cancer1.0.92?.Colorectal cancer1.1.20?.Esophageal cancer1.0.75?.Ethnicity 0.060{ 0.074 ,0.001 1.22 0.95?.56 0.{Caucasians 0.Vivin 231G.C polymorphism in case and control groups.First author [Ref]Year Country Cancer typeSNPCase Total G 78 CControl GG GC CC MAF Total G 38 38 0.59 67 362 220 268 220 711 132 250 57 90 C 44 GG GC CC MAF 31 28 8 0.33 0.44 0.51 0.53 0.P value of HWE testCheng et al [21] Gazouli et al [22] Yang et al-1 [25] Yang et al-2 [37] Zhu et al [28] Huang et al [30] Antonacopoulou et al [29] Upadhyay et al [36] Borges Bdo et al [24]2008 China 2009 Greece 2009 China 2009 China 2009 China 2010 China 2010 Greece 2011 India 2011 BrazilGastric cancer Colorectal cancer Gastric 11967625 cancer231G.C 96 231G.C 312 231G.C1140.67 0.11 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.43 0.18 0.09 0.267 357 68 202 238 46 218 224 55 202 238131 113 0.57 110 64 108 58 110 64 0.54 0.51 0.409 315 123 163 76 216 224 47 250 286 63 216 224 47 122 51 124 81 122Esophageal cancer 231G.C 221 Gastric cancer Colorectal cancer Colorectal cancer 231G.C 220 231G.C 702 231G.C590 814 144 302 256 0.58 210 116 63 302 198 96 58 36 20 84 16 0.36 0.40 0.705 717 180 345 186 0.50 182 82 66 50 16 0.31 0.33 0.Esophageal cancer 231G.C 250 Gastric cancer 231G.C110 44 18333 167 105 123 22 70 44 21 28Ref = reference; SNP = single nucleotide polymorphism; MAF = minor allele frequency; HWE = Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054081.tgenetic models (allele model: OR = 1.31, 95 CI: 1.10?.57, P = 0.003; dominant model: OR = 1.30, 95 CI: 1.05?.61, P = 0.017; recessive model: OR = 1.54, 95 CI: 1.17?.03, P = 0.002; homozygous model: OR = 1.66, 95 CI: 1.18?.33, P = 0.003; heterozygous model: OR = 1.46, 95 CI: 1.12?.89, P = 0.005) (Figure 2). In the stratified analysis by cancer types, significant associations were observed between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and increased risk of colorectal cancer under all genetic models (allele model: OR = 1.45, 95 CI: 1.20?.75, P,0.001; dominant model:OR = 1.51, 95 CI: 1.22?.88, P,0.001; recessive model: OR = 1.58, 95 CI: 1.08?.32, P = 0.020; homozygous model: OR = 1.84, 95 CI: 1.20?.82, P = 0.006). Furthermore, we also found significant connections between the CC genotype of survivin 231G.C polymorphism and increased risk of gastric cancer under the recessive and heterozygous genetic models (OR = 1.75, 95 CI: 1.07?.86, P = 0.026; OR = 1.59, 95 CI: 1.14?.22, P = 0.006; respectively) (Figure 3). However, there was only two studies referred to esophageal cancer susceptibility, which were conducted in India and China [36,37], respectively. In addition,Figure 2. Forest plot of ORs with a random-effects model for associations between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and gastrointestinal tract cancer risk under dominant model (CC+GC vs. GG). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054081.gTable 3. Meta-analysis of the association between survivin 231G.C polymorphism and gastrointestinal tract cancer risk.CC+GC vs. GG (Dominant model) CC vs. GG+GC (Recessive model) CC vs. GG (Homozygous model) CC vs. GC (Heterozygous model)SubgroupsC vs. G (Allele model)OR95 CIPOR 95 CI OR 95 CI OR 95 CI ORPhPPhPPhPPh95 CIPPhCancer types 0.121{ 0.002 0.115 0.041 1.06 0.81?.38 0.696 0.421 1.32 0.50?.50 0.571{ 0.004 1.32 0.51?.46 1.51 1.22?.88 ,0.001 0.282 1.58 1.08?.32 0.020{ 0.048 1.84 1.20?.82 0.006{ 0.568{ 1.27 0.75?.15 0.017 1.75 1.07?.86 0.053 1.86 0.90?.83 ,0.001{ 0.673{ 0.384{ 0.026{ 0.094{ 0.009 0.067 0.012 1.59 1.38 1.33 1.14?.22 0.006{ 0.90?.14 0.144{ 0.50?.54 0.568{ 0.309 0.035 0.Gastric cancer1.0.92?.Colorectal cancer1.1.20?.Esophageal cancer1.0.75?.Ethnicity 0.060{ 0.074 ,0.001 1.22 0.95?.56 0.{Caucasians 0.
http://calcium-channel.com
Calcium Channel
