The associations between common SNPs of EFEMP1 gene and glioma risk in Chinese population

Figures & data

Figure 1 Acquisition process of eligible studies in the meta-analysis.

Table 1 Quality evaluation of the eligible articles

Categories	Items	Yang et al^Citation12 study	Jiang et al^Citation13 study	Qin et al^Citation14 study	Zhang et al^Citation15 study
Selection	Adequacy of case definition	*	*	*	*
	Representativeness of the cases	*	*	*	*
	Selection of controls	*	*	*	*
	Definition of controls	*	*	*	*
Comparability Exposure	Comparability of cases/controls	*	*	*	*
	Ascertainment of exposure	*	*	*	*
	Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls	*	*	*	*
	Non-response rate	–	–	–	–

Note:

* Eligible item according to the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.

Table 2 The main characteristics of the eligible studies

Study	Year of publication	Country	Detection method	Source	Cases	Controls	SNPs	Base change	Gene location of SNPs	Association with glioma risk
Yang et al^Citation12	2017	China	TaqMan	Hospital	350	706	rs1346787	A/G	3′near gene	Yes
							rs3791679	G/A	Intron 10	Yes
							rs17047290	A/G	Intron 5	No
Jiang et al^Citation13	2016	China	PCR-RFLP	Hospital	94	206	rs3791679	G/A	Intron 10	Yes
Qin et al^Citation14	2015	China	PCR-RFLP	Hospital	159	364	rs3791679	G/A	Intron 10	Yes
							rs1346786	A/G	Intron 5	No
							rs1344733	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs727878	A/G	Intron 5	No
Zhang et al^Citation15	2015	China	MassARRAY	Hospital	979	1,007	rs1346787	A/G	3′near gene	Yes
							rs3791679	G/A	Intron 10	Yes
							rs17047290	A/G	Intron 5	No
							rs1346786	A/G	Intron 5	Yes
							rs3791675	A/G	Intron 4	Yes
							rs10496055	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs10865291	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs727878	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs1344733	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs3791661	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs3791660	A/C	Intron 4	No
							rs1430195	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs7559906	A/G	Intron 4	No
							rs4233964	A/G	Intron 4	No

Abbreviations: PCR, polymerase chain reaction; SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms; RFLP, restriction length polymorphism.

Table 3 The genotype frequencies of EFEMP1 rs1346787, rs3791679, and rs1346786 polymorphisms

Study	rs1346787 (cases)				rs1346787 (controls)				PHWE
	AA	AG	GG	Total	AA	AG	GG	Total
Yang et al^Citation12	157	150	43	350	414	245	47	706	0.193
Zhang et al^Citation15	825	146	8	979	894	107	6	1,007	0.159
	rs3791679 (cases)				rs3791679 (controls)
	GG	GA	AA	Total	GG	GA	AA	Total
Yang et al^Citation12	170	139	41	350	444	225	37	706	0.228
Jiang et al^Citation13	14	43	37	94	13	87	106	206	0.382
Qin et al^Citation14	58	73	28	159	171	154	39	364	0.624
Zhang et al^Citation15	595	331	53	979	667	301	38	1,006	0,579
	rs1346786 (cases)				rs1346786 (controls)
	AA	AG	GG	Total	AA	AG	GG	Total
Qin et al^Citation14	51	76	32	159	129	168	67	364	0.347
Zhang et al^Citation15	716	241	22	979	798	193	14	1,005	0.551

Abbreviation: HWE, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium.

Table 4 Meta-analysis of the associations between EFEMP1 SNPs and glioma risk

SNP ID	Comparison	PH	Model	PZ	OR (95% CI)
rs1346787	GG vs AA	0.38	F	<0.001	2.22 (1.46–3.36)
	AG vs AA	0.65	F	<0.001	1.54 (1.27–1.87)
	(GG+AG) vs AA	0.38	F	<0.001	1.60 (1.34–1.93)
	GG vs (AG+AA)	0.54	F	0.003	1.86 (1.24–2.78)
	G vs A	0.48	F	<0.001	1.54 (1.32–1.79)
rs3791679	AA vs GG	<0.001	R	0.34	1.42 (0.69–2.92)
	AG vs GG	0.03	R	0.13	1.26 (0.94–1.69)
	(AA+AG) vs GG	0.002	R	0.21	1.26 (0.88–1.82)
	AA vs (AG+GG)	<0.001	R	0.24	1.40 (0.80–2.46)
	A vs G	<0.001	R	0.24	1.21 (0.88–1.68)
rs1346786	GG vs AA	0.40	F	0.12	1.40 (0.92–2.12)
	AG vs AA	0.42	F	0.003	1.34 (1.10–1.62)
	(GG+AG) vs AA	0.39	F	0.001	1.36 (1.13–1.63)
	GG vs (AG+AA)	0.37	F	0.23	1.27 (0.86–1.86)
	G vs A	0.19	F	0.001	1.28 (1.10–1.50)

Note: Bold values indicate statistical significance.

Abbreviations: P_H, P value of heterogeneity; P_Z, P value of Z test; OR, odds ratio; SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms; R, random-effects model; F, fixed-effects model.

Table 5 The association of EFEMP1 rs3791679 with glioma risk after omitting Jiang et al’s study¹³

SNP ID	Comparison	PH	Model	PZ	OR (95% CI)
rs3791679	AA vs GG	0.17	F	<0.001	2.05 (1.55–2.71)
	AG vs GG	0.29	F	<0.001	1.35 (1.17–1.56)
	(AA+AG) vs GG	0.10	R	<0.001	1.49 (1.18–1.89)
	AA vs (AG+GG)	0.30	F	<0.001	1.81 (1.38–2.37)
	A vs G	0.05	R	<0.001	1.45 (1.18–1.78)

Abbreviations: P_H, P value of heterogeneity; P_Z, P value of Z test; OR, odds ratio; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; R, random-effects model; F, fixed-effects model.

Figure 2 Begg’s funnel plot assessing the publication bias for rs3791679 polymorphism under AG vs GG model.

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; SE, standard error.

LangYQuBXiaXImpact of interaction between the G870A and EFEMP1 gene polymorphism on glioma risk in Chinese Han populationOncotarget2017823375613756728380465

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

JiangNPengYPWangXYDouCWHeWMAssessing the association between EFEMP1 rs3791679 polymorphism and risk of glioma in a Chinese Han populationGenet Mol Res2016153

 Google Scholar

QinGQiSLuDYuJHuangWYuLEFEMP1 rs3791679 polymorphism was associated with susceptibility to gliomaInt J Clin Exp Pathol20158152221522726823870

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

ZhangSYeZSongXAssociation of EFEMP1 gene polymorphisms with the risk of glioma: a hospital-based case–control study in a Chinese Han populationJ Neurol Sci2015349545925638659

 PubMedGoogle Scholar