MCO Molecular and Clinical Oncology 2049-9450 2049-9469 D.A. Spandidos 10.3892/mco.2016.824 MCO-0-0-824 Articles Association between CYP2E1 polymorphisms and risk of gastric cancer: An updated meta-analysis of 32 case-control studies ZHANGMING-XING 1 2 LIUKAI 1 WANGFU-GANG 1 WENXIAO-WEN 1 SONGXI-LIN 1 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, Shandong 250117, P.R. China Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Liaocheng People's Hospital, Liaocheng, Shandong 252000, P.R. China Correspondence to: Professor Xi-Lin Song, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, 440 Ji-Yan Road, Jinan, Shandong 250117, P.R. China, E-mail: songxilin11@hotmail.com 06 2016 18 03 2016 4 6 1031 1038 01042015 03032016 Copyright © 2016, Spandidos Publications 2016

Previous studies suggested that RsaI/PstI and DraI polymorphisms on cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1) may be associated with susceptibility to gastric cancer (GC). However, this association remains ambiguous. A meta-analysis of previously published studies was performed in an attempt to elucidate this association. The odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were used to assess the strength of the association. In the overall analyses of RsaI/PstI and DraI, no association was identified. In the subgroup analyses, RsaI/PstI was identified to increase the risk of GC in the smoking population. In addition, in the previous studies of interactions with other genes, RsaI/PstI was revealed to be associated with increased GC risks when glutathione S-transferase-µ-1 or glutathione S-transferase θ-1 was null or DraI was homozygous wild-type. However, these stratified analyses were lacking credibility due to the limitation of correlational study numbers. In conclusion, CYP2E1 polymorphisms revealed no association with the risk of GC.

 cytochrome P450 2E1 RsaI/PstI DraI gastric cancer polymorphism meta-analysis Introduction

For the past few years, the worldwide incidence of gastric cancer (GC) has decreased (1); however, GC remains the second leading cause of cancer-associated mortality worldwide (2). The incidence and mortality rate is rising in Eastern Asia (1,2), particularly in China (3). The growth of GC incidences is hypothesized to be caused by the interplay of environmental and genetic factors, which varies between area, gender, age and habitual behaviors (4–8). Specific variant alleles may modify the effects of environmental exposures and the gene-environment interactions may partly affect GC incidence (5). In the last decade, more and more previous studies have focused on the association between polymorphisms and GC, however, only a few revealed an association with GC (4,7).

As an important metabolic enzyme, cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1) is critical in the metabolism of nitrosamines, benzene and vinyl chloride in the human body (9–11). Nitrosamine is considered as a pathogenic factor of GC (12); therefore, it is assumed that the variant alleles in CYP2E1 may affect the incidence of GC (13).

RsaI/PstI and DraI polymorphisms are regarded as the most frequent and powerful polymorphisms in CYP2E1 (14). RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, which are in complete linkage disequilibrium in the 5′-flanking promoter region of CYP2E1, are associated with higher transcription and increased enzyme activity (15). The DraI polymorphisms, however, are considered only to enhance transcription (14). The variant alleles in RsaI/PstI polymorphisms cause three genotypes, termed wild-type homozygous (C1C1), heterozygous (C1C2) and variant homozygous (C2C2) (15,16). DraI polymorphisms are divided into wild-type homozygous (DD), heterozygous (CD) and variant homozygous (CC) genotypes (17).

Studies concerning the association of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms and GC susceptibility have been performed in numerous previous studies, however, the results remain uncertain and controversial (18–45). However, investigations regarding DraI polymorphisms have rarely been performed. In the present study, 32 case-control studies (18–45) of 4,953 cases and 6,626 controls were screened from published papers between January 1995 and October 2014. These previous studies were used to calculate pooled statistics by meta-analysis, aiming to clarify the relevance of CYP2E1 polymorphisms and GC risk.

 Materials and methods <sec> <title>Identification of previous studies

Data screening was performed in PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure database (http://oversea.cnki.net/kns55/default.aspx) between January 1995 and October 2014, without language limitation. The key words used for screening were ‘CYP2E1’, ‘Cytochrome P450 2E1’, ‘polymorphism’, ‘gastric’, ‘neoplasm’, ‘cancer’ and ‘variation’. The titles and abstracts of each paper were browsed for preliminary screening. The references of retrieved papers were also examined to search for additional relevant studies.

 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The previous studies were selected using the following inclusion criteria: i) Case-control studies; ii) studies focusing on the relevance between CYP2E1 RsaI/PstI or DraI polymorphisms and GC susceptibility; iii) studies where detailed genotype frequencies were provided. Previous studies lacking Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) were excluded. The titles and abstracts were reviewed for selection and the full-text papers were intensively read to confirm eligibility. Two reviewers were required to screen the studies independently, according to the criteria, and a third was involved in discussing any disagreement occurring between the previous two reviewers.

 Data extraction

A form was designed to gather the following information: First author, year, country, ethnicity, genotyping method, source of control, numbers of different genotypes in cases/controls and HWE. The authors of the previous studies were contacted to confirm dubious information.

 Statistical analysis

The meta-analysis focused on the associations between the CYP2E1 polymorphisms (RsaI/PstI and DraI) and GC susceptibility. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) were used to explain the correlation. In the previous studies of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, ORs and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the dominant model (C1C2 + C2C2 vs. C1C1) and allele frequency C2, vs. C1. An OR and 95% CI <1 indicated a significant difference between the cases and controls. In the subgroup analysis, the previous studies were grouped according to ethnicity, source of control, smoking and drinking status, and histology type. The ORs and 95% CIs of each group were also calculated to assess the influence of these factors on the association. In the previous studies of DraI polymorphisms, the ORs and 95% CIs were estimated for the dominant model (CD + CC vs. DD) and allele frequency (C vs. D).

In the meta-analysis, the I2 value was used to confirm heterogeneity (46), with values <25, 25–50 and >50% indicating low, moderate and high heterogeneity, respectively. A χ2-based Q test was also used for the heterogeneity test (Ph), together with the random-effect model, in order to obtain a relatively conservative outcome (47). The significance of the pooled ORs and their 95% CIs were determined using the Z test. A Pearson's χ2 test was used for assessing the HWE.

In order to elucidate the influence of each previous study included, influence analysis was performed by excluding each study in turn and analyzing the homogeneity and effect size for the remaining studies. Publication bias was assessed using Begg and Mazumdar's adjusted rank correlation test (48) and the Egger regression asymmetry test (49). Funnel plots were also used to illustrate the publication bias (50). All statistical calculations were performed using STATA 12.0 software (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

 Results <sec> <title>Searching results and characteristics of the previous studies included in the meta-analysis

The flow diagram of the study selection process is shown in Fig. 1. A total of 81 previous studies were identified in the database search, among which three studies were duplicated. A further 35 previous studies were excluded as a result of inconformity of case-control studies or irrelevance with the RsaI/PstI and DraI polymorphisms. The remaining 43 previous studies were read in full, among which five studies without detailed genotype frequencies were excluded. Following the exclusion of six previous studies for discordance of HWE, 32 previous studies were included in the meta-analysis (18–45). Of these, 26 were associated with RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, while the remaining six (20,24,27,33,35,43) were investigating DraI polymorphisms. Details of these previous studies are shown in Table I.

These previous studies were subgrouped according to ethnicity, source of control, smoking and drinking status, and histology type. Stratified analysis was performed in these subgroups. Previous studies concerning the interactions between RsaI/PstI and glutathione S-transferase-µ-1 (GSTM1) (36), glutathione S-transferase θ-1 (GSTT1) (40) or DraI (27,35) were listed and analyzed in order to identify more factors, which may influence the risk of GC (Table II).

 Meta-analysis results

In the overall analysis of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, the ORs and 95% CIs were 0.96 (0.82 and 1.12) in the dominant model (C1C2 + C2C2 vs. C1C1) and 1.02 (0.86 and 1.19) in gene frequency (C2 vs. C1; Table III).

The subgroup analyses of the clinical characteristics are shown in Table III. In the source of control subgroups, no significant differences were observed either in population-based studies or hospital-based studies. As for ethnicity, no significant differences were observed in any of the three subgroups (Fig. 2). In the smoking status subgroup, a significantly increased risk was observed in the smoking group [C1C2 / C2C2 vs. C1C1 = 1.56 (1.14 and 2.15), as shown in Fig. 3], while the non-smoking group revealed no significant difference. Subgroups of drinking status revealed no association with GC risk. In the previous studies, which assessed the interactions of different genes, RsaI/PstI was demonstrated to increase GC risks when GSTM1 was null [2.60 (1.13 and 5.99)]. A significantly increased risk was also observed in the previous studies investigating the interaction between RsaI/PstI and GSTT1. In the GSTT1 null group, a significant difference was observed between increased risk of GC and RsaI/PstI [0.22 (0.09 and 0.54)].

In the meta-analysis of DraI polymorphisms, no significant risk of GC susceptibility was observed either in the dominant model (CD + CC vs. DD) or allele frequency (C vs. D). However, the interaction analysis of RsaI/PstI and DraI on CYP2E1 revealed that RsaI/PstI significantly increased the risk of GC when DraI was wild-type (DD) [1.55 (1.13 and 2.14)].

 Heterogeneity between the previous studies

Heterogeneities of each comparison are shown in Table III. The results revealed that I2 = 61.4% and Ph<0.001. Compared with the overall analysis of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, heterogeneities decreased in several subgroups (population-based controls group: I2 = 35.3% and Ph = 0.147; Caucasian group: I2 = 41.1% and Ph = 0.192).

In previous DraI polymorphism studies, the heterogeneity P-values were markedly higher compared with the critical value (P=0.01), noting that heterogeneities in the group of DraI polymorphisms were very little.

 Sensitivity analysis

Influence analysis was performed by excluding studies one-by-one and analyzing the homogeneity and effect size for all of the remaining studies, aiming at examining the stability of the analysis. The results revealed that no individual study affected the pooled ORs significantly, in either the RsaI/PstI or DraI studies, confirming the stability of the analysis. This was associated with the high quality of the previous studies included.

 Publication bias

Begg and Mazumdar's adjusted rank correlation test and the Egger regression asymmetry test were each used to examine the publication bias, as well as funnel plots. The results revealed that no publication bias was observed in RsaI/PstI (Fig. 4) and DraI studies. Publication bias occurred in the studies of RsaI/PstI [Egger's test: P=0.033 in the dominant model (C1C2 + C2C2, vs. C1C1)], while no publication bias was observed in the DraI studies.

 Discussion

For previous studies of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, the overall analysis revealed no association between mutant C2 and GC risk. However, in the subgroup analysis, mutant C2 in RsaI/PstI significantly increased GC risk in the smoking population and GSTM1- or GSTT1-null populations. In the DraI polymorphism studies, variant allele C revealed no association with GC risk. In the interaction analysis, C2 in RsaI/PstI was revealed to increase GC risk when the DraI was not mutated.

The present study obtained two meta-analyses focusing on the association between RsaI/PstI polymorphisms and GC susceptibility (20,51). It was demonstrated that RsaI/PstI polymorphisms increased GC risk in the smoking population; however, no focus on the DraI polymorphisms or the interactions between two polymorphisms was provided. Therefore, the updated meta-analysis included 32 previous studies, in which 26 studies were on RsaI/PstI and the remaining six studies were on DraI. In our meta-analysis, more subgroups were made due to their potential influence on GC susceptibility. Furthermore, the present study demonstrated the interaction analysis between different gene polymorphisms. Previous studies on these interaction analyses may be insufficient; however, the results obtained may provide a guidance of which type of studies are required in the future.

In the 26 studies of RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, no significant differences were observed in the homozygous dominant model (C1C2 + C2C2 vs. C1C1) and in C2 vs. C1, indicating the lack of association between the RsaI/PstI polymorphisms and the risk of GC.

In the subgroup analysis on source of controls, no statistically significant risks were observed in either groups with hospital-based controls or groups with population-based controls. Although hospital-based controls may not always be truly representative of the general population (52), differences were reflected between GC patients and those of healthy individuals. Population-based controls are an improved representation of the entire population gene frequency compared with hospital-based controls, and provide a good reflection of gene frequency differences between GC patients and the overall population. Therefore, more case-control studies based on population-based controls will be performed in the future.

As for the subgroup analysis of ethnicity, no statistically significant differences were observed among groups of Asians, Caucasian or mixed. Although no statistically significant differences appeared in the subgroups, heterogeneity of the genotype frequencies existed in different ethnic groups clinically. The variant alleles C2 and C frequencies in CYP2E1 harbored in Asians are markedly higher compared with those in aCaucasians or African-Americans (53–55). Similar cases were observed in several other polymorphisms (56). It is hypothesized that various living environments and diverse genotypes lead to different degrees of cancer susceptibility (8). A lack of association between GC risks and RsaI/PstI in Caucasians and mixed populations may be attributed to insufficiency of studies included and more studies of Caucasians are required in the future.

In the smoking subgroup, mutant C2 was demonstrated to be associated with increased GC risk. A previous study (57) revealed that smoking is a risk of cancer. Tobacco smoke contains many carcinogens, including benzopyrene and nitrosamine. CYP2E1 is critical in the metabolism of nitrosamines, benzene and vinyl chloride in the human body. Therefore, the interaction between smoking and CYP2E1 polymorphisms may magnify the GC incidence. Previous studies focusing on the interaction between smoking status and CYP2E1 were few, and more credible results depended on more studies being included (18,20–22,31,45).

In the drinking status subgroup, no significant association was observed between RsaI/PstI polymorphisms and GC risk. Alcohol can directly stimulate the gastric mucosa and damage gastric mucosal, making the gastric mucosal epithelium more susceptible to carcinogens (58). In addition, the stimulation of alcohol activated the function of CYP2E1 and in this resulted in an increased GC susceptibility with a synergistic effect. More studies involving an interaction between drinking and CYP2E1 polymorphisms may assist in obtaining a positive result.

According to the pathological type, GC can be divided into intestinal and diffuse types. Tumor cells in the intestinal type are normally confined to the lining of the stomach, while the diffuse type has a tendency to widely spread. The subgroup analysis may assist in understanding how differences in CYP2E1 affects the two types of GC. However, the result revealed no significant difference between the intestinal and diffuse groups.

Six previous DraI polymorphism studies (20,24,27,33,35,43), showed that no significant association was observed between DraI polymorphisms and GC risk. However, in consideration of the fact that only six studies were included in the research regarding DraI polymorphisms, the reliability of the results depended on more DraI studies being included. These results should be treated with caution, as more case-control tests are required to support the results.

Tumor incidence is often a combination of multiple factors. The interaction of multiple genes increases the impact on GC susceptibility compared with a single gene. Notably, negative association between a gene and cancer susceptibility does not mean that the gene has no impact on cancer risk. In the previous studies, which involved RsaI/PstI polymorphisms and other genes, it was revealed that the RsaI/PstI polymorphism significantly increases GC risk when GSTM1 or GSTT1 were in a null status. GSTT1 and GSTM1 convert carcinogens in the body into an inactive state, therefore, detoxifying them. However, when GSTT1 and GSTM1 are mutated into a null state, their detoxification functions are lost, which increases cancer susceptibility (59). Additionally, mutant genotype C2 in RsaI/PstI has a suppressive effect in this process and GC risk was increased by such an interaction theoretically. Statistically, no significant result was obtained. However, the results were based on limited research data and the credibility was questionable. Further studies are required to improve the result in the future.

The two polymorphisms on an identical gene may lead to a synergistic effect or antagonism. When analyzing the interaction of RsaI/PstI and DraI polymorphisms, the mutant C2 in RsaI/PstI was revealed to increase GC risk when the DraI was without mutation (DD). This result may reveal that the two polymorphisms are working antagonistically. An RsaI/PstI mutation may increase cancer risks, while DraI functions with the opposite effect. Previous studies (17,60) on DraI polymorphisms and cancer susceptibility have revealed that DraI was more likely to be a risk factor of cancer, which is contrary to our assumption. By contrast, limited data may bring the contingency and must be treated with caution.

The heterogeneities in the subgroups of Caucasians and population-based controls decreased compared with the overall analysis of the RsaI/PstI polymorphisms, meaning that the source of controls and ethnic groups are undoubtedly factors for the formation of heterogeneity.

Publication bias occurred in the studies of RsaI/PstI, most probably due to several reasons: Previous studies with negative results are more difficult to publish compared with those with positive results; authors prefer to write articles with positive results as opposed to negative results. The existence of publication bias led to our cautious attitude to the positive results obtained in the present meta-analysis.

Certain limitations were observed in this meta-analysis. Firstly, only published results were included, which actually contributed to publication bias, causing the results to be treated with a conservative attitude. Secondly, several previous studies were excluded since they provided no detailed genotypic frequencies, therefore adding selection bias to a certain extent. Thirdly, more studies focusing on RsaI/PstI and DraI polymorphisms in the same cases and controls were included; however, the authors provided no matched genotype frequencies of the two genetic loci, which resulted in exploring the interaction between them with limited data. Finally, the lack of the sample size influenced the credibility in several subgroup analyses and gene interaction studies. More studies focusing on large-scale samples with multi-variables are required in the future. In conclusion, a lack of association was observed between the risk of GC and CYP2E1 RsaI/PstI or DraI polymorphisms.

 Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Professors and members of the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute (Jinan, China) for their hard work.

 References KarimiPIslamiFAnandasabapathySFreedmanNDKamangarFGastric cancer: Descriptive epidemiology, risk factors, screening and preventionCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev23700713201410.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-105724618998 JemalABrayFCenterMMFerlayJWardEFormanDGlobal cancer statisticsCA Cancer J Clin616990201110.3322/caac.2010721296855 YangLIncidence and mortality of gastric cancer in ChinaWorld J Gastroenterol121720200610.3748/wjg.v12.i1.1716440411 GianfagnaFDe FeoEvan DuijnCMRicciardiGBocciaSA systematic review of meta-analyses on gene polymorphisms and gastric cancer riskCurr Genomics9361374200810.2174/13892020878569954419506726 HamiltonJPMeltzerSJA review of the genomics of gastric cancerClin Gastroenterol Hepatol4416425200610.1016/j.cgh.2006.01.01916616344 MilneANCarneiroFO'MorainCOfferhausGJNature meets nurture: Molecular genetics of gastric cancerHum Genet126615628200910.1007/s00439-009-0722-x19657673 SaekiNOnoHSakamotoHYoshidaTGenetic factors related to gastric cancer susceptibility identified using a genome-wide association studyCancer Sci10418201310.1111/cas.1204223057512 YoshidaTOnoHKuchibaASaekiNSakamotoHGenome-wide germline analyses on cancer susceptibility and GeMDBJ database: Gastric cancer as an exampleCancer Sci10115821589201010.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01590.x20507324 BellecGDréanoYLozachPMénezJFBerthouFCytochrome P450 metabolic dealkylation of nine N-nitrosodialkylamines by human liver microsomesCarcinogenesis1720292034199610.1093/carcin/17.9.20298824531 Ingelman-SundbergMRonisMJLindrosKOEliassonEZhukovAEthanol-inducible cytochrome P4502E1: Regulation, enzymology and molecular biologyAlcohol Alcohol Suppl213113919948974327 RaucyJLKranerJCLaskerJMBioactivation of halogenated hydrocarbons by cytochrome P4502E1Crit Rev Toxicol23120199310.3109/104084493091040728471158 La VecchiaCD'AvanzoBAiroldiLBragaCDecarliANitrosamine intake and gastric cancer riskEur J Cancer Prev4469474199510.1097/00008469-199512000-000058580782 AgundezJACytochrome P450 gene polymorphism and cancerCurr Drug Metab5211224200410.2174/138920004333562115180491 UematsuFIkawaSKikuchiHRestriction fragment length polymorphism of the human CYP2E1 (cytochrome P450IIE1) gene and susceptibility to lung cancer: Possible relevance to low smoking exposurePharmacogenetics45863199410.1097/00008571-199404000-000027915935 HayashiSWatanabeJKawajiriKGenetic polymorphisms in the 5′-flanking region change transcriptional regulation of the human cytochrome P450IIE1 geneJ Biochem11055956519911778977 UchimotoTItogaSNezuMSunagaMTomonagaTNomuraFRole of the genetic polymorphisms in the 5′-flanking region for transcriptional regulation of the human CYP2E1 geneAlcohol Clin Exp Res31Suppl 1S36S42200710.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00284.x17331164 TangKLiYZhangZThe PstI/RsaI and DraI polymorphisms of CYP2E1 and head and neck cancer risk: A meta-analysis based on 21 case-control studiesBMC Cancer10575201010.1186/1471-2407-10-57520969746 AgudoASalaNPeraGNo association between polymorphisms in CYP2E1, GSTM1, NAT1, NAT2 and the risk of gastric adenocarcinoma in the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutritionCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1510431045200610.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-007316702391 GonzálezARamírezVCuencaPSierraRPolymorphisms in detoxification genes CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTT1 and GSTM1 in gastric cancer susceptibilityRev Biol Trop525916002004(In Spanish)17361553 BocciaSDe LauretisAGianfagnaFvan DuijnCMRicciardiGCYP2E1PstI/RsaI polymorphism and interaction with tobacco, alcohol and GSTs in gastric cancer susceptibility: A meta-analysis of the literatureCarcinogenesis28101106200710.1093/carcin/bgl12416837478 CaiLYuSZZhanZFCytochrome P450 2E1 genetic polymorphism and gastric cancer in Changle, Fujian ProvinceWorld J Gastroenterol7792795200110.3748/wjg.v7.i6.79211854903 GaoCTakezakiTWuJInteraction between cytochrome P-450 2E1 polymorphisms and environmental factors with risk of esophageal and stomach cancers in ChineseCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev112934200210.1080/1476665025296265811815398 ColomboJRossitARCaetanoABorimAAWornrathDSilvaAEGSTT1, GSTM1 and CYP2E1 genetic polymorphisms in gastric cancer and chronic gastritis in a Brazilian populationWorld J Gastroenterol1012401245200415112335 DarazyMBalbaaMMugharbilACYP1A1, CYP2E1, and GSTM1 gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to colorectal and gastric cancer among LebaneseGenet Test Mol Biomarkers15423429201110.1089/gtmb.2010.020621385088 GhoshalUTripathiSKumarSGenetic polymorphism of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A1, CYP1A2 and CYP2E1 genes modulate susceptibility to gastric cancer in patients with Helicobacter pylori infectionGastric Cancer17226234201410.1007/s10120-013-0269-323686565 NanHMSongYJYunHYParkJSKimHEffects of dietary intake and genetic factors on hypermethylation of the hMLH1 gene promoter in gastric cancerWorld J Gastroenterol1138343841200510.3748/wjg.v11.i25.383415991278 FengJPanXYuJFunctional PstI/RsaI polymorphism in CYP2E1 is associated with the development, progression and poor outcome of gastric cancerPLoS One7e44478201210.1371/journal.pone.004447822957075 KatoSOndaMMatsukuraNCytochrome P4502E1 (CYP2E1) genetic polymorphism in a case-control study of gastric cancer and liver diseasePharmacogenetics5S141S144199510.1097/00008571-199512001-000167581484 KatoSOndaMMatsukuraNGenetic polymorphisms of the cancer related gene and Helicobacter pylori infection in Japanese gastric cancer patients. An age and gender matched case-control studyCancer77Suppl 8S1654S1661199610.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960415)77:8<1654::AID-CNCR35>3.0.CO;2-X KatoSNaitoZMatsudaNLocalization of cytochrome P4502E1 enzyme in normal and cancerous gastric mucosa and association with its genetic polymorphism in unoperated and remnant stomachJ Nippon Med Sch78224234201110.1272/jnms.78.22421869556 MalakarMDeviKRPhukanRKCYP2E1 genetic polymorphism with dietary, tobacco, alcohol habits, H. pylori infection status and susceptibility to stomach cancer in Mizoram, IndiaAsian Pac J Cancer Prev1588158822201410.7314/APJCP.2014.15.20.881525374213 MalikMAUpadhyayRMittalRDZargarSAModiDRMittalBRole of xenobiotic-metabolizing enzyme gene polymorphisms and interactions with environmental factors in susceptibility to gastric cancer in Kashmir ValleyJ Gastrointest Cancer402632200910.1007/s12029-009-9072-019521675 WuMSChenCJLinMTGenetic polymorphisms of cytochrome p450 2E1, glutathione S-transferase M1 and T1, and susceptibility to gastric carcinoma in TaiwanInt J Colorectal Dis17338343200210.1007/s00384-001-0383-212172927 NishimotoINHanaokaTSugimuraHCytochrome P450 2E1 polymorphism in gastric cancer in Brazil: Case control studies of Japanese Brazilians and non-Japanese BraziliansCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev9675680200010919737 ParkGTLeeOYKwonSJAnalysis of CYP2E1 polymorphism for the determination of genetic susceptibility to gastric cancer in KoreansJ Gastroenterol Hepatol1812571263200310.1046/j.1440-1746.2003.03167.x14535982 SuzukiSMuroishiYNakanishiIOdaYRelationship between genetic polymorphisms of drug-metabolizing enzymes (CYP1A1, CYP2E1, GSTM1 and NAT2), drinking habits, histological subtypes, and p53 gene point mutations in Japanese patients with gastric cancerJ Gastroenterol39220230200410.1007/s00535-003-1281-x15064998 TsukinoHKurodaYQiuDNakaoHImaiHKatohTEffects of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2A6 gene deletion and CYP2E1 genotypes on gastric adenocarcinomaInt J Cancer100425428200210.1002/ijc.1049212115524 LiZXuLRelationship between cytochrome P450 2E1 gene polymorphism and gastric cancer susceptibilityJ Pract Med338033812007 QianYXuYShenHYuRTanYZhouLNiuJRelationship between CYP2E1, GSTT1 genetic polymorphisms and susceptibility to gastric cancerChina's primary health care18202001 QianYXuYShenHZhouLYuRNiuJTanYRelationship Between CYP2E1, GSTT1 Genetic Polymorphisms and Susceptibility to Gastric CancerChin J Prev Control Chron Non Commun Dis1071092003 WangYJiangYSunWEffects of genetic polymorphism of cytochrome P4502E1 on susceptibility to gastric cancerChin J Publ Health6646652005 YanSBaiZZhaoJXieDWuJCorrelation between genetic polymorphisms of CYP2E1 RsaI and susceptibility of gastric cancer in Qinghai provinceJ Qinghai Med Coll347142013 SuYZhenzhongBJian-xinZCorrelation between genetic polymorphisms of CYP2E1 Dra I and susceptibility of gastric cancer in Qinghai provinceChina Oncol232732782013 YeMLiuJZhouXDengCAssociation between CYE2E1 genotype and genetic susceptibility of gastric cancerJ Fourth Mil Med Univ226522672002 ZhouJGaoCTakezakiTLiZWuJDingJLiuYLiSHuXKaiHTajimaKInteraction between polymorphisms in CYP2E1 Rsa I genotypes and lifestyle with risk of stomach cancerJ Oncol92852882003 HigginsJPThompsonSGDeeksJJAltmanDGMeasuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ327557560200310.1136/bmj.327.7414.55712958120 DerSimonianRLairdNMeta-analysis in clinical trialsControl Clin Trials7177188198610.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-23802833 BeggCBMazumdarMOperating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication biasBiometrics5010881101199410.2307/25334467786990 EggerMSmithDavey GSchneiderMMinderCBias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical testBMJ315629634199710.1136/bmj.315.7109.6299310563 MunafòMRClarkTGFlintJAssessing publication bias in genetic association studies: Evidence from a recent meta-analysisPsychiatry Res1293944200410.1016/j.psychres.2004.06.01115572183 ZhuoWZhangLWangYLingJZhuBChenZCYP2E1 RsaI/PstI polymorphism and gastric cancer susceptibility: Meta-analyses based on 24 case-control studiesPLoS One7e48265201210.1371/journal.pone.004826523139769 Ruano-RavinaAPérez-RíosMBarros-DiosJMPopulation-based versus hospital-based controls: Are they comparable?Gac Sanit22609613200810.1016/S0213-9111(08)75363-919080941 GarteSGaspariLAlexandrieAKMetabolic gene polymorphism frequencies in control populationsCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1012391248200111751440 NeafseyPGinsbergGHattisDJohnsDOGuytonKZSonawaneBGenetic polymorphism in CYP2E1: Population distribution of CYP2E1 activityJ Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev12362388200910.1080/1093740090315835920183527 StephensEATaylorJAKaplanNEthnic variation in the CYP2E1 gene: Polymorphism analysis of 695 African-Americans, European-Americans and TaiwanesePharmacogenetics4185192199410.1097/00008571-199408000-000027987402 SchmidtHMHaDMTaylorEFVariation in human genetic polymorphisms, their association with Helicobacter pylori acquisition and gastric cancer in a multi-ethnic countryJ Gastroenterol Hepatol2617251732201110.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06799.x21649724 BenowitzNLPengMJacobPIIIEffects of cigarette smoking and carbon monoxide on chlorzoxazone and caffeine metabolismClin Pharmacol Ther74468474200310.1016/j.clpt.2003.07.00114586387 MurataMTakayamaKChoiBCPakAWA nested case-control study on alcohol drinking, tobacco smoking, and cancerCancer Detect Prev2055756519968939341 MasoudiMSaadatIOmidvariSSaadatMGenetic polymorphisms of GSTO2, GSTM1, and GSTT1 and risk of gastric cancerMol Biol Rep36781784200910.1007/s11033-008-9245-018398695 WuXAmosCIKempBLCytochrome P450 2E1 DraI polymorphisms in lung cancer in minority populationsCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev7131819989456237

Flow diagram of included and excluded studies. HWE, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.

Forest plot of dominant comparison model (C1C2/C2C2 vs. C1C1) for subgroup comparison in RsaI/PstI. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Forest plot of dominant comparison model for subgroup comparison (smoking status) in RsaI/PstI. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Funnel plot for publication bias in dominant model (C1C2/C2C2 vs. C1C1) in RsaI/PstI polymorphisms. (Beggs P-value = 0.108, Eggers P-value = 0.033). OR, odds ratio; SE, standard error.

Characteristics of previous studies in the meta-analysis.

Cases Control
Authors (year) Country Ethnicity Genotyping method Source C1C1 C1C2 C2C2 C1C1 C1C2 C2C2 HWE Refs.
RasI/PstI
  Ghoshal (2014) India Asian PCR-RFLP PB 40 45 3 103 58 9 Y (25)
  Yan (2013) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 77 39 4 79 36 5 Y (42)
  Feng (2012) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 348 128 34 374 119 17 Y (27)
  Malik et al (2009) India Asian PCR-RFLP HB 88 20 0 177 17 1 Y (32)
  Agudo et al (2006) Britain Caucasian PCR-RFLP PB 226 13 0 880 39 1 Y (18)
  Colombo et al (2004) Brazil Mixed PCR-RFLP HB 89 11 0 134 16 0 Y (23)
  Zhou et al (2003) China Asian PCR-RFLP PB 85 45 15 140 75 14 Y (45)
  Park et al (2003) Korea Asian PCR-RFLP PB 80 33 7 94 48 3 Y (35)
  Wu et al (2002) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 215 108 33 199 70 9 Y (33)
  Tsukino et al (2002) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 71 42 7 88 58 12 Y (37)
  Cai et al (2001) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 58 27 6 71 22 1 Y (21)
  Qian et al (2001) China Asian PCR-RFLP PB 88 47 7 88 68 8 Y (39)
  Kato et al (1995) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 90 54 6 120 69 14 Y (28)
  González et al (2004) Costa Rica Asian PCR-RFLP HB 20 11 0 31 15 5 Y (19)
  Boccia et al (2007) Italy Caucasian PCR-RFLP HB 102 5 – 234 20 – Y (20)
  Gao et al (2002) China Asian PCR-RFLP PB 58 31 9 121 62 13 Y (22)
  Nan et al (2005) Korea Asian PCR-RFLP HB 69 39 – 129 88 – Y (26)
  Kato et al (2011) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 280 186 – 340 213 – Y (30)
  Kato et al (1996) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 55 29 – 87 61 – Y (29)
  Malakar et al (2014) India Asian PCR-RFLP PB 93 11 1 182 28 0 Y (31)
  Nishimoto et al (2000) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 31 27 1 69 58 6 Y (34)
  Suzuki et al (2004) Japan Asian PCR-RFLP HB 107 38 – 112 65 – Y (36)
  Li and Xu (2007) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 25 10 6 17 16 8 Y (38)
  Qian et al (2003) China Asian PCR-RFLP PB 64 22 4 47 39 4 Y (40)
  Wang et al (2005) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 33 14 1 22 23 3 Y (41)
  Ye (2002) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 39 13 4 26 24 6 Y (44)
DraI
  Yan (2013) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 70 42 8 70 46 4 Y (42)
  Feng et al (2012) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 334 131 45 318 160 32 Y (27)
  Wu et al (2002) China Asian PCR-RFLP HB 195 120 41 158 100 20 Y (33)
  Park et al (2003) Korea Asian PCR-RFLP PB 78 35 7 85 45 8 Y (35)
  Boccia et al (2007) Italy Caucasian PCR-RFLP HB 92 15 – 227 27 – Y (20)
  Darazy et al (2011) Lebanon Asian PCR-RFLP PB 12 1 0 66 4 0 Y (24)

HWE, Hardy Weinberg equilibrium; PCR-RFLP, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism; PB, population-based; HB, hospital-based; C1C1, wild-type homozygous; C1C2, heterozygous; C2C2, variant homozygous.

Distribution of CYP2E1 RsaI/PstI and influential factors.

No. (cases/controls) of CYP2E1 Rsal/Pstl polymorphism
C1C1 C1C2 + C2C2
Influential factors (Exposure + vs. exposure -) Exposure + Exposure − Exposure + Exposure − Refs.
Smoking (ever vs. never)
  Cai et al (2001) 37/23 21/48 23/11 10/12 (21)
  Agudo et al (2006) 151/503 79/403 9/18 4/22 (18)
  Boccia et al (2007) 49/99 53/135 1/9 4/11 (20)
  Gao et al (2002) 41/75 17/44 32/25 8/37 (22)
  Malakar et al (2014) 73/105 20/77 20/11 8/1 (31)
  Zhou et al (2003) 66/83 19/54 47/42 12/45 (45)
Drinking (ever vs. never)
  Zhou et al (2003) 33/33 49/107 23/22 36/66 (45)
  Suzuki et al (2004) 48/32 51/51 17/13 20/34 (36)
  Malakar et al (2014) 43/73 51/109 4/16 8/12 (31)
  Gao et al (2002) 9/13 49/108 5/9 35/66 (22)
  Cai et al (2001) 32/20 25/51 19/8 14/15 (21)
  Boccia et al (2007) 68/123 32/111 5/10 0/10 (20)
Histology type (intestinal vs. diffuse)
  Ghoshal et al (2014) 27/103 8/103 23/67 20/67 (25)
  Kato et al (1996) 27/87 28/87 17/61 12/61 (29)
  Wu et al (2002) 98/199 99/199 49/79 46/79 (33)
  Nishimoto et al (2000) 17/69 8/69 6/64 3/19 (34)
  Suzuki et al (2004) 52/112 55/112 15/65 23/65 (36)
GSTM1 (present vs. null)
  Suzuki et al (2004) 67/22 45/30 26/5 39/10 (36)
GSTT1 (present vs. null)
  Zhou et al (2003) 22/30 42/17 14/21 12/22 (45)
CYP2E1 DraI (DD vs. CD + CC)
  Park et al (2003) 71/79 9/13 7/6 33/40 (35)
  Feng et al (2012) 212/233 136/141 122/85 40/51 (27)

CYP2E1, cytochrome P450 2E1; GSTM1, glutathione S-transferase-μ-1; GSTT1, glutathione S-transferase θ-1; C1C1, wild-type homozygous; C1C2, heterozygous; C2C2, variant homozygous; DD, wild-type homozygous; CD, heterozygous; CC, variant homozygous.

Stratified analyses of polymorphisms in the CYP2E1 gene with gastric cancer risk.

C2 vs. C1 C1C2/C2C2 vs. C1C1
Rsal/Pstl No. (cases/controls) OR (95% CI) P-value Ph I2 (%) OR (95% CI) P-value Ph I2 (%)
Overall 3,727/5,510 1.02 (0.86, 1.19) 0.850 <0.001 61.4 0.96 (0.82, 1.12) 0.574 <0.001 56.2
Source of controls
  PB 1,027/2,124 1.02 (0.84, 1.25) 0.811 0.147 35.3 0.96 (0.73, 1.28) 0.828 0.032 54.4
  HB 2,700/3,386 1.00 (0.79, 1.27) 0.993 <0.001 70.2 0.94 (0.78, 1.15) 0.583 0.001 59.0
Ethnicities
  Asian 3,281/4,186 1.01 (0.85, 1.20) 0.954 <0.001 65.1 0.95 (0.81, 1.12) 0.562 <0.001 60.3
  Caucasian 346/1,174 1.23 (0.65, 2.31) 0.526 – – 0.94 (0.44, 2.00) 0.872 0.192 41.1
  Mixed 100/150 1.03 (0.47, 2.27) 0.936 – – 1.04 (0.46, 2.33) 0.934 – –
Smoking status
  Ever smoking 549/1,014 – – – – 1.56 (1.14, 2.15) 0.006 0.376 6.3
  Never smoking 255/889 – – – – 1.23 (0.59, 2.60) 0.571 0.018 63.3
Drinking status
  Ever drinking 305/372 – – – – 0.91 (0.61, 1.37) 0.676 0.752 0.0
  Never drinking 371/740 – – – – 1.08 (0.75, 1.54) 0.663 0.238 26.2
Histology type
  Intestinal 331/906 – – – – 0.84 (0.54, 1.32) 0.456 0.045 58.9
  Diffuse 315/906 – – – – 1.05 (0.71, 1.58) 0.798 0.131 43.6
GSTM1 status
  Present 93/27 – – – – 1.71 (0.59, 4.99) 0.328 – –
  Null 84/40 – – – – 2.60 (1.13, 5.99) 0.025 – –
GSTT1 status
  Present 36/51 – – – – 0.91 (0.38, 2.17) 0.830 – –
  Null 54/39 – – – – 0.22 (0.09, 0.54) 0.001 – –
DraI status
  DD 412/403 – – – – 1.55 (1.13, 2.14) 0.007 0.747 0.0
  CD + CC 218/165 – – – – 0.88 (0.57, 1.34) 0.544 0.487 0.0
C vs. D CD+CC vs. DD
DraI No. (cases/controls) OR (95% CI) P-value Ph I2 (%) OR (95% CI) P-value Ph I2 (%)
  Overall 1,226/1,116 1.05 (0.91, 1.20) 0.540 0.784 0.0 0.97 (0.82, 1.15) 0.727 0.782 0.0

CYP2E1, cytochrome P450 2E1; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; PB, population-based; HB, hospital-based; GSTM1, glutathione S-transferase-μ-1; GSTT1, glutathione S-transferase θ-1; DD, wild-type homozygous; CD, heterozygous; CC, variant homozygous.