Table 2.
Meta-analysis of the association between the MCP-1 rs1024611polymorphism and T2DM risk (T2DM vs. healthy control)
| Genetic variant | Study group | No. studies | Heterogeneity test | Association test (FE model) | Association test (RE model) | Publication bias | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I2 | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | P value* | |||
| GG + GA vs.AA (dominant) | Overall | 13 | 46.8 | 0.032 | 0.92 (0.82–1.03) | 0.134 | 0.98 (0.81–1.20) | 0.855 | 0.110 |
| Population | |||||||||
| Asian | 11 | 39.1 | 0.088 | 1.04 (0.89–1.21) | 0.627 | 1.07 (0.85–1.34) | 0.556 | ||
| Caucasian | 2 | 0.0 | 0.372 | 0.79 (0.66–0.93) | 0.006 | 0.79 (0.66–0.93) | 0.006 | ||
| Genotyping method | |||||||||
| PCR–RFLP | 10 | 58.6 | 0.010 | 0.90 (0.79–1.03) | 0.118 | 1.00 (0.77–1.23) | 0.986 | ||
| ARMS-PCR | 2 | 0.0 | 0.596 | 0.98 (0.77–1.25) | 0.865 | 0.98 (0.77–1.25) | 0.865 | ||
| TaqMan-PCR | 1 | - | - | 0.76 (0.27–2.16) | 0.610 | 0.76 (0.27–2.16) | 0.610 | ||
| GG vs. GA + AA (recessive) | Overall | 13 | 53.6 | 0.011 | 0.83 (0.72–0.96) | 0.013 | 0.89 (0.71–1.12) | 0.321 | 0.332 |
| Population | |||||||||
| Asian | 11 | 54.8 | 0.015 | 0.82 (0.70–0.95) | 0.011 | 0.89 (0.69–1.15) | 0.377 | ||
| Caucasian | 2 | 66.0 | 0.086 | 0.92 (0.66–1.27) | 0.611 | 0.44 (0.04–4.50) | 0.490 | ||
| Genotyping method | |||||||||
| PCR–RFLP | 10 | 63.4 | 0.003 | 0.82 (0.70–0.95) | 0.010 | 0.87 (0.65–1.15) | 0.326 | ||
| ARMS-PCR | 2 | 0.0 | 0.512 | 0.91 (0.60–1.39) | 0.656 | 0.91 (0.60–1.39) | 0.660 | ||
| TaqMan-PCR | 1 | - | - | 1.23 (0.49–3.07) | 0.666 | 1.23 (0.49–3.07) | 0.666 | ||
| GG vs.AA (homozygote model) | Overall | 13 | 50.0 | 0.02 | 0.89 (0.75–1.06) | 0.204 | 0.94 (0.71–1.25) | 0.689 | 0.273 |
| Population | |||||||||
| Asian | 11 | 52.6 | 0.02 | 0.92 (0.75–1.13) | 0.420 | 0.98 (0.71–1.36) | 0.925 | ||
| Caucasian | 2 | 66.5 | 0.084 | 0.83 (0.59–1.16) | 0.277 | 0.39 (0.04–4.14) | 0.436 | ||
| Genotyping method | |||||||||
| PCR–RFLP | 10 | 61.6 | 0.005 | 0.89 (0.73–1.08) | 0.232 | 0.95 (0.66–1.37) | 0.784 | ||
| ARMS-PCR | 2 | 0.0 | 0.455 | 0.91 (0.58–1.42) | 0.669 | 0.91 (0.58–1.42) | 0.672 | ||
| TaqMan-PCR | 1 | - | - | 0.93 (0.28–3.06) | 0.903 | 0.93 (0.28–3.06) | 0.903 | ||
| GG vs.GA (heterozygote model) | Overall | 13 | 48.6 | 0.025 | 0.82 (0.71–0.96) | 0.011 | 0.87 (0.69–1.10) | 0.251 | 0.410 |
| Population | |||||||||
| Asian | 11 | 41.7 | 0.071 | 0.78 (0.66–0.92) | 0.003 | 0.84 (0.67–1.07) | 0.154 | ||
| Caucasian | 2 | 64.3 | 0.094 | 1.06 (0.75–1.50) | 0.731 | 0.52 (0.05–5.11) | 0.579 | ||
| Genotyping method | |||||||||
| PCR–RFLP | 10 | 58.9 | 0.009 | 0.80 (0.68–0.94) | 0.008 | 0.85 (0.51–1.41) | 0.249 | ||
| ARMS-PCR | 2 | 0.0 | 0.637 | 0.90 (0.58–1.40) | 0.632 | 0.90 (0.58–1.40) | 0.634 | ||
| TaqMan-PCR | 1 | - | - | 1.38 (0.51–3.72) | 0.519 | 1.38 (0.51–3.72) | 0.519 | ||
| G vs. A (allele contrast model) | Overall | 13 | 53.5 | 0.011 | 0.91 (0.84–0.98) | 0.014 | 0.93 (0.82–1.06) | 0.296 | 0.293 |
| Population | |||||||||
| Asian | 11 | 53.8 | 0.017 | 0.94 (0.85–1.03) | 0.189 | 0.97 (0.83–1.14) | 0.726 | ||
| Caucasian | 2 | 63.6 | 0.097 | 0.84 (0.74–0.97) | 0.016 | 0.73 (0.45–1.19) | 0.202 | ||
| Genotyping method | |||||||||
| PCR–RFLP | 10 | 63.4 | 0.003 | 0.89 (0.78–1.15) | 0.009 | 0.92 (0.78–1.09) | 0.32 | ||
| ARMS-PCR | 2 | 0.0 | 0.500 | 0.97 (0.81–1.16) | 0.748 | 0.97 (0.81–1.16) | 0.749 | ||
| TaqMan-PCR | 1 | - | - | 1.00 (0.54–1.83) | 0.992 | 1.00 (0.54–1.83) | 0.992 | ||
Abbreviations: No. Number, RE Random-effects, FE Fixed-effects, PCR–RFLP Polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism, ARMS-PCR Amplification refractory mutation detection system-polymerase chain reaction
− Not available
* Publication bias test (Egger’s test)