Candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms of irritable bowel syndrome: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Zhu, Shiwei; Wang, Ben; Jia, Qiong; Duan, Liping

doi:10.1186/s12876-019-1084-z

BMC Gastroenterology

Table 1 Summary of results of all polymorphisms for five genetic models

From: Candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms of irritable bowel syndrome: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Gene rs.	Gene Model	p1 value^a	OR (96% CI)^b	p2 value^c	Analysis model
SLC6A4 5-HTTLPR	AM: s vs. l	0.008	1.169 (0.908, 1.505)	0.226	REM
	DM: ls + ss vs. ll	0.013	0.967 (0.689, 1.358)	0.848	REM
	RM: ss vs. ll + ls	0.008	1.169 (0.908, 1.505)	0.226	REM
	HoM: ss vs. ll	0.004	1.114 (0.724, 1.714)	0.623	REM
	HeM: ls vs. ll	0	2.312 (1.084, 4.931)	0.03	REM
COMT rs4680	AM: A vs. G	0.07	1.011 (0.843, 1.212)	0.91	FEM
	DM: GA + AA vs. GG	0.311	0.827 (0.632, 1.082)	0.167	FEM
	RM: AA vs. GG + GA	0.044	1.461 (0.730, 2.924)	0.284	REM
	HoM: AA vs. GG	0.018	1.291 (0.522, 3.189)	0.581	REM
	HeM: GA vs.GG	0.141	0.673 (0.5, 0.907)	0.009	FEM
TNFα rs1800629	AM: A vs. G	0.301	0.95 (0.831, 1.086)	0.453	FEM
	DM: GA + AA vs. GG	0.315	0.866 (0.576, 1.303)	0.49	FEM
	RM: AA vs. GG + GA	0.107	0.895 (0.587, 1.364)	0.606	FEM
	HoM: AA vs. GG	0.415	0.854 (0.565, 1.290)	0.453	FEM
	HeM: GA vs.GG	0.096	0.954 (0.856, 1.111)	0.543	FEM
IL10 rs1800896	AM: G vs. A	0.774	0.935 (0.826, 1.508)	0.286	FEM
	DM: GA + GG vs. AA	0.842	1.024 (0.842, 1.245)	0.815	FEM
	RM: GG vs. AA + GA	0.321	0.806 (0.655, 0.992)	0.042	FEM
	HoM: GG vs. AA	0.719	0.855 (0.661, 1.105)	0.23	FEM
	HeM: GA vs. AA	0.659	1.113 (0.906, 1.367)	0.036	FEM
IL10 rs1800871	AM: C vs. T	0.825	0.944 (0.764, 1.167)	0.596	FEM
	DM: TC + CC vs. TT	0.6	1.022 (0.766, 1.345)	0.878	FEM
	RM: CC vs. TT + TC	0.647	0.701 (0.434, 1.133)	0.147	FEM
	HoM: CC vs. TT	0.596	0.743 (0.444, 1.244)	0.259	FEM
	HeM: TC vs.TT	0.496	1.092 (0.818, 1.456)	0.551	FEM
IL6 rs1800795	AM: G vs. C	0.039	1.144 (0.810, 1.373)	0.249	REM
	DM: CG + GG vs. CC	0.292	1.092 (0.888, 1.346)	0.4	FEM
	RM: GG vs. CC + CG	0	1.373 (0.858, 2.198)	0.186	REM
	HoM: GG vs. CC	0.657	1.099 (0.872, 1.387)	0.657	FEM
	HeM: CG vs.CC	0.038	0.905 (0.566, 1.449)	0.679	REM
IL23R rs11465804	AM: G vs. T	0.005	1.266 (0.813, 1.971)	0.296	REM
	DM: TG + GG vs. TT	0.004	1.265 (0.789, 2.029)	0.329	REM
	RM: GG vs. TT + TG	0.902	1.21 (0.460, 3.183)	0.699	FEM
	HoM: GG vs. TT	0.004	1.244 (0.770, 2.009)	0.372	REM
	HeM: TG vs.TT	0.896	1.209 (0.983, 1.487)	0.072	FEM
TNFSF15 rs4263839	AM: G vs. A	0	5.139 (3.859, 6.844)	0	REM
	DM: GA + GG vs. AA	0.012	6.527 (4.616, 9.229)	0	REM
	RM: GG vs. AA+GA	0	2.802 (0.951, 8.261)	0.062	REM
	HoM: GG vs. AA	0.557	19.127 (15.395, 23.765)	0	FEM
	HeM: GA vs. AA	0	9.361 (4.702, 18.637)	0	REM
TNFSF15 rs6478108	AM: T vs. C	0.288	1.143 (1.016, 1.287)	0.026	FEM
	DM: CT + TT vs. CC	0.335	1.235 (0.964, 1.581)	0.094	FEM
	RM: TT vs. CC + CT	0.23	1.171 (0.997, 1.374)	0.054	FEM
	HoM: TT vs. CC	0.287	1.306 (1.005, 1.697)	0.045	FEM
	HeM: CT vs.CC	0.326	1.17 (0.902, 1.519)	0.237	FEM
GNβ3 rs5443	AM: T vs. C	0.013	1.167 (0.825, 1.651)	0.383	REM
	DM: CT + TT vs. CC	0.025	1.196 (0.762, 1.877)	0.437	REM
	RM: TT vs. CC + CT	0.227	1.273 (0.811, 1.998)	0.295	FEM
	HoM: TT vs. CC	0.037	1.394 (0.701, 2.772)	0.344	REM
	HeM: CT vs.CC	0.088	1.166 (0.776, 1.753)	0.459	FEM

a Cochran Q test;b Odds ratio (95% confidence interval); c Mante-Haenszel test; AM Allele models, DM Dominant models, RM Recessive models, HoM Homozygous models, HeM Heterozygous models, REM Random effect model, FEM Fixed effect model

Back to article page

ISSN: 1471-230X

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcgastroenterology@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com