Molecular Medicine Reports Molecular Medicine Reports 1791-2997 1791-3004 D.A. Spandidos 10.3892/mmr.2017.6822 mmr-16-02-1927 Articles Associations of common IL-4 gene polymorphisms with cancer risk: A meta-analysis JiaYingxian 1 2 XieXiaochuan 3 * ShiXiaohan 1 2 * LiShangwei 1 2 Division of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, P.R. China Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, P.R. China Department of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, P.R. China Correspondence to: Professor Shangwei Li, Division of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, 20, 3rd Section of Renming South Road, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, P.R. China, E-mail: lishangwei1125@163.com

Contributed equally

 022017 20062017 16 2 1927 1945 02062016 07042017 Copyright: © Jia et al. 2017 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Cancer incidence is dramatically increasing worldwide, therefore improved prediction and therapeutic methods are needed. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in cytokine genes may contribute to carcinogenesis. Interleukin (IL)-4 gene polymorphisms have been intensively studied with regard to their associations with cancer. However, the results of these previous studies remain inconclusive. The present study, therefore, aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of previously published studies in order to clarify the association of IL-4 with cancer risk. Eligible published articles were searched in Medline, PubMed, Embase and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases up to March 2016. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were used to identify potential associations between IL-4 genetic polymorphisms and the risk of cancer. A meta-analysis was then performed on 10,873 patients and 14,328 controls for IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism, 3,970 patients and 5,686 controls for IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism, and 1,896 patients and 2,526 controls for IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism. A significant association with cancer risk was observed for rs2243250 and rs79071878 polymorphisms. In the subgroup analysis by cancer type, rs2243250 polymorphism was demonstrated to be associated with an increased risk of gastric cancer and breast cancer, rs2070874 polymorphism was correlated with leukemia and oral carcinoma, and rs79071878 polymorphism was relevant to bladder carcinoma risk. In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism was demonstrated to be associated with cancer risk in both Caucasian and Asian populations, rs2070874 was associated with cancer risk in Asian populations, while rs79071878 polymorphism was associated with cancer risk in Caucasian populations. In conclusion, the present results suggested that the IL-4 rs2243250 and rs79071878 polymorphisms were associated with cancer susceptibility. Further subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of IL-4 gene polymorphisms on cancer risk may vary by cancer type and by ethnicity.

 interleukin-4 polymorphisms cancer meta-analysis Introduction

It was estimated that there were ~14 million new cancer cases in 2012 and the number is expected to rise to 22 million in the next two decades (1). Cancer-associated mortality, meanwhile, was ~8.2 million in 2012 and is predicted to rise to 13 million by 2032 (1). Thus, an improved understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms of cancer is of great importance. At present, it is widely accepted that cancer is a multifactorial and complex disease resulting from interaction between environmental and genetic factors (2).

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are frequently occurring variations in the human genome, and have been extensively investigated in genetic studies of cancer. Recent studies have demonstrated that SNPs of multiple genes may have an important role in cancer occurrence and progression (3). In addition, numerous publications have reported that cytokine gene polymorphisms may affect inflammatory-related pathways, and influence susceptibility to different types of cancer (4,5). Interleukin-4 (IL-4) is a potent regulator of antitumor immune responses with both tumor-promoting and tumor-inhibiting properties, since it has both immunosuppressive and anti-angiogenic functions (6–9). Consequently, certain genetic polymorphisms of IL-4 gene are considered as good candidates for cancer susceptibility prediction. To date, several studies have aimed to assess the potential association of IL-4 polymorphisms rs2243250 [-590C to T, 5′untranslated region (UTR)], rs2070874 (−34C to T, 5′ UTR) and rs79071878 (intron-3, 70 bp variable number tandem repeat, VNTR) with cancer risk, but the results remain inconsistent. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed in the present study in order to better elucidate the roles of IL-4 gene polymorphisms in the occurrence and progression of cancer.

 Materials and methods <sec> <title>Study identification and selection

Potentially relevant articles were independently identified by three investigators from the Medline (http://www.medline.com/), PubMed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed), Embase (https://www.embase.com) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases (http://www.cnki.net/). The searching terms were as follows: (Interleukin-4 OR IL-4 OR Interleukin 4 OR IL 4) AND (polymorphism OR variant OR genotype OR allele) AND (cancer OR tumor OR carcinoma OR neoplasm). In addition, the reference lists of retrieved articles were searched manually for additional eligible studies. Among studies with overlapping data published by the same authors, only the most recent and complete study was included in the present meta-analysis.

 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The following inclusion criteria were used to select eligible articles: i) Case-control study of cancer cases and healthy controls; ii) investigate the relationship between IL-4 gene polymorphisms and cancer risk; iii) provide both genotype and allele distributions inpatients and controls; iv) full text in English or Chinese available. Articles were excluded if: i) The study was duplicated; ii) the analyses were based on linkage considerations; iii) the report was not original (reviews or meta-analyses).

 Data extraction and quality assessment

The following information was extracted from all included studies independently by two authors: i) Name of the first author; ii) year of publication; iii) country in which the study was conducted; iv) ethnicity of study population; v) cancer type; vi) allele and genotype frequencies of IL-4 gene polymorphisms in cases and controls; vii) P-value of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in the control group. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to evaluate the quality of all included studies (10). This rating scale has a score range of 0 to 9, and studies with scores >7 were assumed to be of high quality. Two reviewers performed data extraction and quality assessment independently. When necessary, the reviewers wrote to the corresponding authors for extra information or raw data. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by discussion until a consensus was achieved. The final results were reviewed by a senior reviewer.

 Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed with Review Manage version 5.3 (Cochrane, London, United Kingdom). HWE in the control group was estimated using the χ2test. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the strength of the associations between IL-4 gene polymorphisms and cancer susceptibility. In addition, heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the Q test and I2 statistics. When the probability value (P-value) of Q test was <0.1 or I2 was >50%, inter-study heterogeneity was considered to be significant, and the random-effects model (REM) was employed for analyses. Otherwise, the fixed-effect model (FEM) was applied for analyses. First, associations based on all study subjects were analyzed, and then subgroup analyses by cancer type and ethnicity were performed to obtain the cancer type-specific effects and the ethnic-specific effects of IL-4 polymorphisms. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by sequentially omitting one individual study each time to assess the stability of the results. Furthermore, the possible publication bias was evaluated by using funnel plots (data not shown).

 Results <sec> <title>Characteristics of eligible studies

The literature search identified 1,237 eligible articles. After reading titles and abstracts, a total of 94 articles were selected for further evaluation. Amongst these, 51 articles were excluded based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as described in the Methods. Finally, 43 articles (11–53), 33 studies focusing on polymorphism rs2243250, 11 studies onrs2070874, and 10 studies on rs79071878, were included in the meta-analysis. The majority of the articles were published in English, except for three that were published in Chinese. A schematic of the selection process is illustrated in Fig. 1.

 IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and the risk of cancer

For IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism, a total of 33 studies including 10,873 cancer cases and 14,328 normal controls were investigated. Deviations from HWE were observed in 9 studies, while the other 24 studies were in accordance with HWE (Table I). As illustrated in Fig. 2, the meta-analysis identified a significant association between IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk (CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.008, OR=0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.97) with an overt heterogeneity across studies (I2=56%). Subgroup analyses were then performed based on cancer type (Table II). The results suggested that the IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism was significantly associated with an increased risk of gastric cancer (CT vs. TT: P=0.004, OR=0.75, 95% CI 0.61–0.91; CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.002, OR=0.77, 95% CI 0.66–0.91; and C vs. T: P=0.04, OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.01–1.32), breast cancer (CC vs. CT: P=0.05, OR=1.21, 95% CI 1.00–1.46; TT vs. CC: P=0.04, OR=0.56, 95% CI 0.33–0.97; CC vs. CT/TT: P=0.02, OR=1.25, 95% CI 1.04–1.51; and C vs. T: P=0.007, OR=1.25, 95% CI 1.06–1.47), lung cancer (CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.02, OR=0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.97), prostate cancer (CT vs. TT: P=0.004, OR=1.48, 95% CI 1.14–1.92;TT vs. CC: P=0.0009, OR=0.48, 95% CI 0.31–0.74; CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.02, OR=1.33, 95% CI 1.05–1.69; and TT vs. CC/CT: P=0.0004, OR=0.64, 95% CI 0.50–0.82) and leukemia (CC vs. CT: P=0.005, OR=5.35, 95% CI 1.64–17.47;CC vs. CT/TT: P=0.01, OR=4.67, 95% CI 1.42–15.31; and CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.005, OR=0.19, 95% CI 0.06–0.61). Studies in each cancer subgroup were homogenous. No significant association between IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk was identified for oral carcinoma, colorectal cancer, skin cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, lymphoma, bladder cancer, brain tumor, testicular tumor, renal cell carcinoma, and brain tumor (Table II). Subgroup analyses were also conducted by ethnicity. As illustrated in Table II, a significant association between IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk was identified in both Caucasian (CT vs. TT: P=0.03, OR=0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.98, I2=46%; CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.02, OR=0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.96, I2=64%) and Asian populations (CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.006, OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.82–0.97, I2=36%).

 IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism and the risk of cancer

For IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism, 11 studies involving 3,970 patients and 5,686 controls were included. All relevant studies were in agreement with HWE (Table III). Inter-study heterogeneity was obvious in all comparisons and thus REMs were used for analyses. No significant association between IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism and cancer risk was observed in all genetic models (Fig. 3). Further stratification analyses by cancer type revealed a significant association with leukemia (CC vs. CT: P=0.05, OR=3.27, 95% CI1.02–10.45; CT vs. TT: P=0.02, OR=0.03, 95% CI 0.00–0.57; and CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.02, OR=0.24, 95% CI 0.08–0.77), and oral carcinoma (CT vs. TT: P=0.02, OR=1.93, 95% CI1.13–3.29; CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.05, OR=1.67, 95% CI 1.00–2.77; TT vs. CC/CT: P=0.006, OR=0.50, 95% CI 0.31–0.82; and C vs. T: P=0.007, OR=1.69, 95% CI 1.16–2.48) (Table II). Nevertheless, no association was observed between rs2070874 polymorphism and other tumor types (Table III). In the subgroup analyses by ethnicity, a significant association was found in Asian populations (CT vs. CC/TT: P=0.03, OR=0.85, 95% CI 0.73–0.98), but not in Caucasian populations (Table IV).

 IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and the risk of cancer

A total of 10 studies with 1,896 patients and 2,526 controls were involved in the present analyses for IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer risk. HWE test revealed that only one study deviated from HWE (Table V). IL-4 VNTR is a 70 bp repeat. Alleles of two and three repeats were designated as repeat 1 (RP1) and repeat 2 (RP2), respectively, and genotypes of RP1/RP1, RP1/RP2 and RP2/RP2 were designated as RP1.1, RP1.2 and RP2.2, respectively. For RP1.2 vs. RP2.2, RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 and RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2, FEMs were selected for analyses since only mild inter-study heterogeneity was observed. In contrast, for RP1.1 vs. RP1.2, RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2, RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 and RP1 vs. RP2, REMs were used because heterogeneity between studies was significant. The results demonstrated an apparent correlation between IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer risk (RP1.2 vs. RP2.2: P=0.008, OR=1.40, 95% CI 1.09–1.79; RP2.2 vs. RP1.1: P=0.006, OR=0.62, 95% CI0.44–0.87, RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2: P=0.002, OR=0.69, 95% CI 0.55–0.88; and RP1.1 vs. RP2.2: P=0.05, OR=1.26, 95% CI 1.00–1.58; Fig. 4). Further analyses by cancer type subgroup revealed that the rs79071878 polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer (RP1.1 vs. RP1.2: P<0.0001, OR=3.78, 95% CI 2.03–7.05; RP2.2 vs. RP1.1: P=0.002, OR=0.07, 95% CI 0.01–0.38; RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2: P<0.0001, OR=4.28, 95% CI 2.35–7.81; and RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2: P=0.004, OR=0.42, 95% CI 0.24–0.76) and breast cancer (RP1.2 vs. RP2.2: P=0.05, OR=1.70, 95% CI 1.00–2.88) (Table VI). However, no significant association was observed in other types of cancer. Furthermore, stratified analysis by ethnicity yielded a significant association for the IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism with cancer risk in the Asian ethnicity (RP1.2 vs. RP2.2: P=0.03, OR=1.38, 95% CI 1.04–1.83; and RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2: P=0.01, OR=0.71, 95% CI 0.54–0.93). However, no evidence for any associations between IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer risk was detected in the Caucasian ethnicity (Table VI).

 Sensitivity analysis and publication bias

Sensitivity analyses were performed by removing one individual study from the analysis at a time. For IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism, when the study of Chen et al (22) was omitted, the comparison in CT vs. TT yielded positive result (P=0.03, OR=0.88, 95% CI 0.79–0.98). For IL-4 rs2070874 and rs79071878 polymorphisms, however, removing individual studies did not impact the overall results. Publication bias was evaluated with funnel plots, and visual inspection of the funnel plots for all investigated polymorphisms indicated that there was no significant publication bias in the present meta-analysis.

 Discussion

Cancer is a major public health problem with extremely high morbidity and mortality. Certain cytokine gene polymorphisms may serve crucial roles in cancer pathogenesis. Among these, IL-4 rs2243250, rs2070874 and rs79071878 polymorphisms are three intensively studied variants. Previous studies have demonstrated that the T allele of IL-4 rs2243250 and rs2070874 polymorphisms can increase binding of nuclear transcription factors to the promoter region of the IL-4 gene, and thus lead to increased transcription of IL-4 (32,43). In addition, the rs79071878 polymorphism may also affect the transcription activity of IL-4 (54). However, despite the identifications of these potential mechanisms, the results concerning the association of IL-4 gene polymorphisms and cancer risk remain controversial. Thus, in order to clarify this association, a meta-analysis was performed in the present study to estimate the correlation between IL-4 gene polymorphisms (rs2243250, rs2070874 and rs79071878) and cancer susceptibility.

For IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism, the present data suggested that this polymorphism was significantly associated with cancer risk. In subgroup analyses by cancer type, rs2243250 was demonstrated to be associated with a higher risk of gastric cancer and breast cancer. The CT/TT genotype carriers were at a lower risk of developing gastric cancer or breast cancer compared with individuals with the CC genotype. Furthermore, the CT genotype was demonstrated to be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer compared with the CC/TT genotypes. These results suggested that this polymorphism may serve different roles in different types of malignancies. Further subgroup analysis by ethnicity revealed that the IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism was correlated with an increased cancer risk in both Asian and Caucasian populations. The overall analysis for the IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism yielded no significant association with general cancer risk. In the cancer-type subgroup analysis, a significant association of IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism with leukemia and oral carcinoma was identified, with patients carrying the CT genotype or the C allele being more likely to develop oral carcinoma. By contrast, for leukemia the CT genotype carriers were at a lower risk of developing leukemia. It is worth noting that these results should be interpreted with caution, since our estimations regarding leukemia and oral carcinoma were based on one single study. Additionally, in ethnicity sub-analysis, the results indicated a significant association with cancer susceptibility among Asian populations under the recessive genetic model. Finally, the IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism was overtly associated with a higher risk of cancer under the allelic model. The results of subgroup analyses indicated that IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism was significantly associated with bladder cancer and breast cancer in certain genetic models, and an association between IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer susceptibility was only observed among Caucasians, but not Asians. Overall, from general and subgroup analyses, it can be concluded that IL-4 gene polymorphisms may be important in the pathogenesis of certain types of cancer, and their effects on cancer risk may be ethnic specific. Nevertheless, the amount of relevant studies is not sufficient to draw a safe conclusion, and further well-designed studies with larger patient sample size will be required in the future to validate the present results.

Heterogeneity is one of the most important issues when performing meta-analysis. In the present meta-analysis, heterogeneity between studies existed in almost all comparisons. Therefore, we attempted to detect the source of heterogeneity by dividing included studies into different subgroups according to cancer type and ethnicity. The heterogeneity was drastically decreased in most subgroups, suggesting that these two factors contribute to a significant portion of heterogeneity in the present meta-analysis.

When interpreting the results of the present meta-analysis, several limitations should be considered. Firstly, the numbers of relevant studies were limited, and studies regarding several particular types of cancer were extremely lacking. Secondly, although funnel plots did not reveal any publication bias, the possibility of publication bias cannot be completely eliminated, since only published studies were included. Thirdly, the present results were based on unadjusted estimates, while a more precise analysis should have been adjusted by other factors, including smoking, age, and environmental factors. Finally, the present analyses did not consider the possibility of gene-gene or SNP-SNP interactions or the possibility of linkage disequilibrium between polymorphisms. Taking all these limitations into consideration, the results reported by the current study should be interpreted with caution.

In summary, the present results suggest that the IL-4 rs2243250 and rs79071878 polymorphisms were associated with cancer susceptibility. Further subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of IL-4 gene polymorphisms on cancer risk may vary depending on the cancer type and the ethnicity. However, given that the present results were based on limited number of case-control studies, further multi-center studies with larger sample size from different populations are warranted to confirm our results.

 References FerlayJSoerjomataramIDikshitREserSMathersCRebeloMParkinDMFormanDBrayFCancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012Int J Cancer136E359E386201510.1002/ijc.2921025220842 KnoxSSFrom ‘omics’ to complex disease: A systems biology approach to gene-environment interactions in cancerCancer Cell Int1011201010.1186/1475-2867-10-11204206672876152 JangJPBaekICChoiEJKimTGMultiplex genotyping of cytokine gene SNPs using fluorescence bead arrayPLoS One10e0118008201510.1371/journal.pone.0118008256896964331502 BalkwillFMantovaniAInflammation and cancer: Back to Virchow?Lancet357539545200110.1016/S0140-6736(00)04046-011229684 LeiboviciDGrossmanHBDinneyCPMillikanRELernerSWangYGuJDongQWuXPolymorphisms in inflammation genes and bladder cancer: From initiation to recurrence, progression, and survivalJ Clin Oncol2357465756200510.1200/JCO.2005.01.59816110031 BaniyashMChronic inflammation, immunosuppression and cancer: New insights and outlookSemin Cancer Biol168088200610.1016/j.semcancer.2005.12.00216420981 AggarwalBBVijayalekshmiRVSungBTargeting inflammatory pathways for prevention and therapy of cancer: Short-term friend, long-term foeClin Cancer Res15425430200910.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-014919147746 BidwellJKeenLGallagherGKimberlyRHuizingaTMcDermottMFOksenbergJMcNichollJPociotFHardtCD'AlfonsoSCytokine gene polymorphism in human disease: On-line databases, supplement 1Genes Immun26170200110.1038/sj.gene.636373311393658 WangHWJoyceJAAlternative activation of tumor-associated macrophages by IL-4: Priming for protumoral functionsCell Cycle948244835201010.4161/cc.9.24.14322211503303047808 StangACritical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysesEur J Epidemiol25603605201010.1007/s10654-010-9491-z20652370 CrusiusJBCanzianFCapelláGPeñaASPeraGSalaNAgudoARicoFDel GiudiceGPalliDCytokine gene polymorphisms and the risk of adenocarcinoma of the stomach in the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC-EURGAST)Ann Oncol1918941902200810.1093/annonc/mdn40018628242 El-OmarEMRabkinCSGammonMDVaughanTLRischHASchoenbergJBStanfordJLMayneSTGoedertJBlotWJIncreased risk of noncardia gastric cancer associated with proinflammatory cytokine gene polymorphismsGastroenterology12411931201200310.1016/S0016-5085(03)00157-412730860 García-GonzálezMALanasAQuinteroENicolásDParra-BlancoAStrunkMBenitoRSimónM AngelSantolariaSSopeñaFGastric cancer susceptibility is not linked to pro-and anti-inflammatory cytokine gene polymorphisms in whites: A Nationwide Multicenter Study in SpainAm J Gastroenterol10218781892200710.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01423.x17640324 LaiKCChenWCJengLBLiSYChouMCTsaiFJAssociation of genetic polymorphisms of MK, IL-4, p16, p21, p53 genes and human gastric cancer in TaiwanEur J Surg Oncol3111351140200510.1016/j.ejso.2005.07.00516289646 PanXFWenYLohMWenYYYangSJZhaoZMTianZHuangHLanHChenFInterleukin-4 and −8 gene polymorphisms and risk of gastric cancer in a population in Southwestern ChinaAsian Pac J Cancer Prev1529512957201410.7314/APJCP.2014.15.7.295124815430 ZambonCFBassoDMarchetAFasoloMStrangesASchiavonSNavagliaFGrecoEFogarPFaldaAIL-4-588C>T polymorphism and IL-4 receptor alpha [Ex5+14A>G; Ex11+828A>G] haplotype concur in selecting H. pylori cagA subtype infectionsClin Chim Acta389139145200810.1016/j.cca.2007.12.00818179773 LiangXLHuHBJiaAPLiuZPAssociation of PTPN11 and interleukin-4 gene polymorphisms and helicobacter pylori infection with susceptibility to gastric cancerHai Nan Yi Xue2010152010(In Chinese) ChuHWangMYanFZhongDShiDMaLPanXQinCYinCZhangZPolymorphisms in the IL-13 and IL-4R genes are associated with the development of renal cell carcinomaAnn Oncol2321142121201210.1093/annonc/mdr60722317767 CozarJMRomeroJMAptsiauriNVazquezFVilchezJRTalladaMGarridoFRuiz-CabelloFHigh incidence of CTLA-4 AA (CT60) polymorphism in renal cell cancerHum Immunol68698704200710.1016/j.humimm.2007.05.00217678726 JoshiNNBhatSHakeSKaleMKannanSOpposing effects of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokine gene polymorphisms on the risk for breast cancer in western Indian women: A pilot studyInt J Immunogenet41242249201410.1111/iji.1209824164868 SchonfeldSJBhattiPBrownEELinetMSSimonSLWeinstockRMHutchinsonAAStovallMPrestonDLAlexanderBHPolymorphisms in oxidative stress and inflammation pathway genes, low-dose ionizing radiation, and the risk of breast cancer among US radiologic technologistsCancer Causes Control2118571866201010.1007/s10552-010-9613-7207118083076104 ChenJYingXMHuangXMHuangPYanSCAssociation between polymorphisms in selected inflammatory response genes and the risk of prostate cancerOnco Targets Ther92232292016268344824716763 OlsonSHOrlowISimonJTommasiDRoyPBayugaSLudwigEZauberAGKurtzRCAllergies, variants in IL-4 and IL-4R alpha genes, and risk of pancreatic cancerCancer Detect Prev31345351200710.1016/j.cdp.2007.10.00218031948 WelshMMKaragasMRKurigerJKHousemanASpencerSKPerryAENelsonHHGenetic determinants of UV-susceptibility in non-melanoma skin cancerPLoS One6e20019201110.1371/journal.pone.0020019217608833132750 HowellWMTurnerSJTheakerJMBatemanACCytokine gene single nucleotide polymorphisms and susceptibility to and prognosis in cutaneous malignant melanomaEur J Immunogenet30409414200310.1111/j.1365-2370.2003.00425.x14675394 AndrieEMichosAKalampokiVPourtsidisAMoschoviMPolychronopoulouSAthanasiadou-PiperopoulouFKalmantiMHatzakisAParaskevisDGenetic variants in immunoregulatory genes and risk for childhood lymphomasEur J Haematol83334342200910.1111/j.1600-0609.2009.01288.x19508433 MonroyCMCortesACLopezMSD'AmelioAMJrEtzelCJYounesAStromSSEl-ZeinRAHodgkin disease risk: Role of genetic polymorphisms and gene-gene interactions in inflammation pathway genesMol Carcinog503646201110.1002/mc.2074721061265 GaurPMittalMMohantiBDasSFunctional variants of IL4 and IL6 genes and risk of tobacco-related oral carcinoma in high-risk Asian IndiansOral Dis17720726201110.1111/j.1601-0825.2011.01831.x21771210 TsaiMHChenWCTsaiCHHangLWTsaiFJInterleukin-4 gene, but not the interleukin-1 beta gene polymorphism, is associated with oral cancerJ Clin Lab Anal199398200510.1002/jcla.2006015900573 VairaktarisEYapijakisCSerefoglouZAvgoustidisDCritselisESpyridonidouSVylliotisADerkaSVassiliouSNkenkeEPatsourisEGene expression polymorphisms of interleukins-1 beta, −4, −6, −8, −10, and tumor necrosis factors-alpha, -beta: Regression analysis of their effect upon oral squamous cell carcinomaJ Cancer Res Clin Oncol134821832200810.1007/s00432-008-0360-z18273643 LuYWuZPengQMaLZhangXZhaoJQinXLiSRole of IL-4 gene polymorphisms in HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma in a Chinese populationPLoS One9e110061201410.1371/journal.pone.0110061252955914190355 SaxenaRChawlaYKVermaIKaurJEffect of IL-12B, IL-2, TGF-β1, and IL-4 polymorphism and expression on hepatitis B progressionJ Interferon Cytokine Res34117128201410.1089/jir.2013.004324161121 LiXShiWYuGLinLYangBLiJGuoWTangCWangHGaoHInterleukin-4 −590T/C polymorphism influences the susceptibility to nonsmall cell lung cancerDNA Cell Biol31797800201210.1089/dna.2011.142522142023 GuJShenYZhangYAssociation between interleukin-4 polymorphisms and environment and nonsmall cell lung cancer in Chinese populationJ Cancer Res Ther10SupplC135C139201410.4103/0973-1482.14583925450271 ChangWSWangSCChuangCLJiHXHsiaoCLHsuCMTsaiCWLiuSPHsuPCLoYLBauDTContribution of interleukin-4 genotypes to lung cancer risk in TaiwanAnticancer Res3562976301201526504066 SuchyJKłujszo-GrabowskaEKładnyJCybulskiCWokołorczykDSzymańska-PasternakJKurzawskiGScottRJLubińskiJInflammatory response gene polymorphisms and their relationship with colorectal cancer riskBMC Cancer8112200810.1186/1471-2407-8-112184334682386482 WilkeningSTavelinBCanzianFEnquistKPalmqvistRAltieriAHallmansGHemminkiKLennerPFörstiAInterleukin promoter polymorphisms and prognosis in colorectal cancerCarcinogenesis2912021206200810.1093/carcin/bgn10118448485 YannopoulosANikiteasNChatzitheofylaktouATsigrisCThe (−590 C/T) polymorphism in the interleukin-4 gene is associated with increased risk for early stages of corolectal adenocarcinomaIn Vivo2110311035200718210751 WiemelsJLWienckeJKKelseyKTMoghadassiMRiceTUrayamaKYMiikeRWrenschMAllergy-related polymorphisms influence glioma status and serum IgE levelsCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev1612291235200710.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-004117548690 PurdueMPSakodaLCGraubardBIWelchRChanockSJSesterhennIARubertoneMVEricksonRLMcGlynnKAA case-control investigation of immune function gene polymorphisms and risk of testicular germ cell tumorsCancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev167783200710.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-057317220333 ChuHMaLWangMShiDQinCYuanLYinCZhangZThe polymorphisms of IL-4, IL-4R and IL-13 genes and bladder cancer risk in a Chinese population: A case-control studyMol Biol Rep3953495357201210.1007/s11033-011-1334-922170601 AmirzargarAABagheriMGhavamzadehAAlimoghadamKKhosraviFRezaeiNMoheydinMAnsaripourBMoradiBNikbinBCytokine gene polymorphism in Iranian patients with chronic myelogenous leukaemiaInt J Immunogenet32167171200510.1111/j.1744-313X.2005.00502.x15932621 ShamranHAHamzaSJYaseenNYAl-JubooryAATaubDDPriceRLNagarkattiMNagarkattiPSSinghUPImpact of single nucleotide polymorphism in IL-4, IL-4R genes and systemic concentration of IL-4 on the incidence of glioma in Iraqi patientsInt J Med Sci1111471153201410.7150/ijms.9412251702984147641 LuYAssociation of variants of inflammation and immunity genes with susceptibility to gastric cancerNanjing Medical University2010(In Chinese) GuFQureshiAANiuTKraftPGuoQHunterDJHanJInterleukin and interleukin receptor gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to melanomaMelanoma Res18330335200810.1097/CMR.0b013e32830658b2187811312643877 ChenXLTNF-β IL-4 genes polymorphisms and Helicobacter pylori in gastric cancer and duodenal ulcer in the ChineseFujian Medical University2006(In Chinese) TsaiFJChangCHChenCCHsiaTCChenHYChenWCInterleukin-4 gene intron-3 polymorphism is associated with transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladderBJU Int95432435200510.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05315.x15679809 BozdoğanSTErolBDursunABozdoğanGDönmezIMunganNASeydaogluGThe IL-1RN and IL-4 gene polymorphisms are potential genetic markers of susceptibility to bladder cancer: A case-control studyWorld J Urol33389395201510.1007/s00345-014-1323-424850227 HsiehYYChangCCTsaiCHLinCCTsaiFJInterleukin (IL)-12 receptor beta1 codon 378 G homozygote and allele, but not IL-1 (beta-511 promoter, 3953 exon 5, receptor antagonist), IL-2 114, IL-4-590 intron 3, IL-8 3′-UTR2767, and IL-18 105, are associated with higher susceptibility to leiomyomaFertil Steril87886895200710.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.154117222831 ShekariMKordi-TamandaniDMMalekZadehKSobtiRCKarimiSSuriVEffect of anti-inflammatory (IL-4, IL-10) cytokine genes in relation to risk of cervical carcinomaAm J Clin Oncol35514519201210.1097/COC.0b013e31822d9c1222157213 KonwarRChaudharyPKumarSMishraDChattopadhyayNBidHKBreast cancer risk associated with polymorphisms of IL-1RN and IL-4 gene in Indian womenOncol Res17367372200910.3727/09650400978842844219544973 KesarwaniPAhirwarDKMandhaniAMittalRDAssociation between-174 G/C promoter polymorphism of the interleukin-6 gene and progression of prostate cancer in North Indian populationDNA Cell Biol27505510200810.1089/dna.2008.074218694328 YangCMChenHCHouYYLeeMCLiouHHHuangSJYenLMEngDMHsiehYDGerLPA high IL-4 production diplotype is associated with an increased risk but better prognosis of oral and pharyngeal carcinomasArch Oral Biol593546201410.1016/j.archoralbio.2013.09.01024169152 SalimiSMohammadoo-KhorasaniMYaghmaeiMMokhtariMMoossaviMPossible association of IL-4 VNTR polymorphism with susceptibility to preeclampsiaBiomed Res Int2014497031201410.1155/2014/497031248771034020502

Flow diagram of included/excluded studies for the meta-analysis.

Forest plots of association between IL-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk for all genetic models. (A) CC vs. CT. (B) CT vs. TT. (C) TT vs. CC. (D) CC vs. CT. (E) CT vs. CC/TT. (F) TT vs. CC/CT. (G) C vs. T. The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study-specific OR and 95% CI. The area of the squares reflects the weight (inverse of the variance). The diamond represents the summary OR and 95% CI. IL, interleukin; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Forest plot of association between IL-4 rs2070874 polymorphism and cancer risk for all genetic models. (A) CC vs. CT. (B) CT vs. TT. (C) TT vs. CC. (D) CC vs. CT/TT. (E) CT vs. CC/TT. (F) TT vs. CC/CT. (G) C vs. T. The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study specific OR and 95% CI. The area of the squares reflects the weight (inverse of the variance). The diamond represents the summary OR and 95% CI. IL, interleukin; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Forest plot of association between IL-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer risk for all genetic models. (A) RP1.1 vs. RP1.2. (B) RP1.2 vs. RP2.2. (C) RP2.2 vs. RP1.1. (D) RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2. (E) RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2. (F) RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2. (G) RP1 vs. RP2. The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study specific OR and 95% CI. The area of the squares reflects the weight (inverse of the variance). The diamond represents the summary OR and 95% CI. Alleles of two and three repeats were designated as RP1 and RP2, respectively. Genotypes were designated as RP1.1=RP1/RP1, RP1.2=RP1/RP2 and RP2.2=RP2/RP2. IL, interleukin; RP, repeat; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Characteristics of subjects included in the meta-analysis of interleukin-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk.

Case Control
First author, year Country Ethnicity Cancer type n Genotypes CC/CT/TT Alleles C/T (%) n Genotypes CC/CT/TT Alleles C/T (%) P-value HWE NOS score (Refs.)
Amirzargar, 2005 Iran Caucasian Leukemia 30 13/17/0 71.7/28.3 40 5/35/0 56.3/43.7 <0.001 7 (42)
Andrie, 2009 Greece Caucasian Lymphoma 85 66/17/2 87.6/12.4 85 70/14/1 90.6/9.6 0.753 7 (26)
Chang, 2015 Taiwan Asian Lung cancer 358 247/95/16 82.3/17.7 716 439/218/59 76.5/23.5 <0.001 7 (35)
Chen, 2016 China Asian Prostate cancer 439 46/171/222 30.0/70.0 524 29/173/322 22.0/78.0 0.368 7 (22)
Chu, 2012 China Asian Bladder cancer 816 39/264/513 21.0/79.0 1140 46/393/701 21.3/78.7 0.322 7 (41)
Chu, 2012 China Asian Renal cell carcinoma 620 22/189/409 18.8/81.2 623 36/195/392 21.4/78.6 0.079 7 (18)
Cozar, 2007 Spain Caucasian Renal cell carcinoma 127 93/30/4 85.0/15.0 174 123/47/4 84.2/15.8 0.844 7 (19)
Cozar, 2007 Spain Caucasian Colorectal cancer 96 68/25/3 83.9/16.1 174 123/47/4 84.2/15.8 0.844 7 (19)
Crusius, 2008 Netherlands Caucasian Gastric cancer 242 159/76/7 81.4/18.6 1154 824/305/25 84.6/15.4 0.603 7 (11)
El-omar, 2003 Scotland Mixed Esophageal cancer 90 55/28/7 76.7/23.3 209 153/46/10 84.2/15.8 0.013 7 (12)
El-omar, 2003 Scotland Mixed Gastric cancer 122 78/37/7 79.1/20.9 209 153/46/10 84.2/15.8 0.013 7 (12)
Garcia-Gonzalez, 2007 Spain Caucasian Gastric cancer 404 283/107/14 83.3/16.7 404 267/123/14 81.3/18.7 0.971 8 (13)
Gaur, 2011 India Caucasian Oral carcinoma 140 18/55/67 32.5/67.5 120 9/35/76 22.1/77.9 0.095 8 (28)
Gu, 2014 China Asian Lung cancer 500 22/157/321 20.1/79.9 500 15/161/324 19.1/80.9 0.348 7 (34)
Howell, 2003 UK Caucasian Skin cancer 153 130/23/0 92.5/7.5 208 165/39/4 88.7/11.3 0.352 8 (25)
Joshi, 2014 India Caucasian Breast cancer 163 120/39/4 85.6/14.4 224 144/72/8 80.4/19.6 0.786 8 (20)
Lai, 2005 Taiwan Asian Gastric cancer 123 2/38/83 17.1/82.9 162 7/50/105 19.8/80.2 0.736 7 (14)
Li, 2012 China Asian Lung cancer 1072 54/280/738 18.1/81.9 1126 94/341/691 23.5/76.5 <0.001 7 (33)
Liang, 2010 China Asian Gastric cancer 238 10/53/175 15.3/84.7 112 6/28/78 17.9/82.1 0.118 7 (17)
Lu, 2014 China Asian Hepatocellular cancer 154 4/39/111 15.3/84.7 170 4/51/115 17.4/82.6 0.055 7 (31)
Monroy, 2011 USA Mixed Lymphoma 100 69/27/4 82.5/17.5 100 67/24/9 79.0/21.0 0.006 7 (27)
Olson, 2007 USA Mixed Prostate cancer 149 101/39/9 80.9/19.1 128 96/26/6 85.2/14.8 0.026 7 (23)
Pan, 2014 China Asian Gastric cancer 308 39/69/200 23.9/76.1 307 9/100/198 19.2/80.8 0.390 7 (15)
Purdue, 2007 USA Mixed Testicular germ cell tumor 506 363/133/10 84.9/15.1 606 450/143/13 86.1/13.9 0.680 8 (40)
Saxena, 2014 India Caucasian Hepatocellular carcinoma 59 16/40/3 61.0/39.0 153 58/88/7 66.7/33.3 <0.001 7 (32)
Schonfeld, 2010 USA Mixed Breast cancer 838 616/206/16 85.8/14.2 1074 750/289/35 83.3/16.7 0.273 8 (21)
Suchy, 2008 Poland Caucasian Colorectal cancer 350 225/113/12 80.4/19.6 350 230/107/13 81.0/19.0 0.899 8 (36)
Tsai, 2005 Taiwan Asian Oral carcinoma 130 9/21/100 15.0/85.0 105 2/28/75 15.2/84.8 0.741 7 (29)
Vairaktaris, 2008 Greek and German Caucasian Oral carcinoma 156 84/46/26 68.6/31.4 162 99/48/15 75.9/24.1 0.016 7 (30)
Welsh, 2011 UK Caucasian Skin cancer 892 675/197/20 86.6/13.3 801 608/174/19 86.8/13.2 0.126 8 (24)
Wiemels, 2007 USA Mixed Glioma 384 278/95/11 84.8/15.2 468 313/144/11 82.3/17.7 0.239 8 (39)
Wilkening, 2008 North Sweden Caucasian Colorectal cancer 304 183/104/17 77.3/22.7 582 339/200/43 75.4/24.6 0.079 8 (37)
Yang, 2014 Taiwan Asian Oral carcinoma 463 13/148/302 18.8/81.2 623 23/218/382 21.2/78.8 0.233 7 (53)
Yang, 2014 Taiwan Asian Pharyngeal carcinoma 129 4/43/82 19.8/80.2 623 23/218/382 21.2/78.8 0.233 7 (53)
Yannopoulos, 2007 Greece Caucasian Colorectal cancer 93 73/15/5 86.6/13.4 108 69/30/9 77.8/22.2 0.041 7 (38)
Zambon, 2008 Italy Caucasian Gastric cancer 40 32/7/1 88.8/11.2 64 45/17/2 83.6/16.4 0.800 7 (16)

Significant associations are denoted in bold font. HWE, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.

Subgroup analyses for interleukin-4 rs2243250 polymorphism and cancer risk.

A, Gastric cancer (n=6a)
Variable P-value OR (95% Cl) I-square (%) P-value for the heterogeneity
CC vs. CT 0.47 1.24 (0.69–2.20) 78% 0.0003
CT vs. TT 0.004 0.75 (0.61–0.91) 0% 0.85
TT vs. CC 0.57 0.81 (0.40–1.66) 63% 0.02
CC vs. CT + TT 0.11 1.42 (0.92–2.20) 68% 0.007
CT vs. CC + TT 0.002 0.77 (0.66–0.91) 0% 0.62
TT vs. CC + CT 0.63 1.06 (0.85–1.32) 0% 0.95
C vs. T 0.04 1.15 (1.01–1.32) 21% 0.28
B, Oral carcinoma (n=3a)
CC vs. CT 0.43 1.41 (0.60–3.30) 45% 0.14
CT vs. TT 0.68 0.84 (0.37–1.91) 80% 0.007
TT vs. CC 0.67 0.78 (0.25–2.44) 77% 0.01
CC vs. CT + TT 0.45 0.41 (0.58–3.47) 70% 0.04
CT vs. CC + TT 0.90 0.96 (0.54–1.71) 70% 0.03
TT vs. CC + CT 0.83 1.09 (0.50–2.39) 82% 0.004
C vs. T 0.88 1.05 (0.60–1.84) 82% 0.004
C, Colorectal cancer (n=3a)
CC vs. TT 0.51 1.12 (0.80–1.57) 55% 0.11
CT vs. TT 0.43 1.20 (0.76–1.90) 0% 0.86
TT vs. CC 0.83 1.04 (0.70–1.55) 0% 0.41
CC vs. CT + TT 0.39 1.16 (0.83–1.62) 58% 0.09
CT vs. CC + TT 0.74 0.97 (0.79–1.19) 50% 0.14
TT vs. CC + CT 0.23 0.77 (0.50–1.19) 0% 0.84
C vs. T 0.31 1.15 (0.88–1.52) 56% 0.10
D, Lung cancer (n=3a)
CC vs. CT 0.97 0.99 (0.67–1.47) 63% 0.07
CT vs. TT 0.19 0.85 (0.67–1.08) 54% 0.14
TT vs. CC 0.75 0.87 (0.35–2.17) 89% 0.00001
CC vs. CT + TT 0.89 1.05 (0.54–2.01) 88% 0.0002
CT vs. CC + TT 0.02 0.84 (0.75–0.97) 0% 0.58
TT vs. CC + CT 0.86 0.96 (0.62–1.49) 85% 0.001
C vs. T 0.92 1.02 (0.68–1.54) 92% 0.00001
E, Skin cancer (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.59 1.06 (0.86–1.31) 0% 0.39
CT vs. TT 0.84 1.07 (0.57–2.00) 23% 0.25
TT vs. CC 0.72 0.89 (0.49–1.64) 44% 0.18
CC vs. CT + TT 0.53 1.07 (0.87–1.31) 33% 0.22
CT vs. CC + TT 0.60 0.94 (0.76–1.17) 0% 0.43
TT vs. CC + CT 0.74 0.90 (0.49–1.65) 41% 0.19
C vs. T 0.45 1.17 (0.77–1.77) 59% 0.12
F, Hepatocellular cancer (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.37 0.23 (0.01–5.69) 92% 0.0005
CT vs. TT 0.62 0.88 (0.54–1.44) 0% 0.79
TT vs. CC 0.93 1.05 (0.36–3.04) 10% 0.33
CC vs. CT + TT 0.46 0.51 (0.09–3.03) 80% 0.03
CT vs. CC + TT 0.16 0.55 (0.23–1.27) 84% 0.01
TT vs. CC + CT 0.95 0.99 (0.62–1.58) 36% 0.21
C vs. T 0.28 0.48 (0.13–1.80) 96% 0.00001
G, Lymphoma (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.42 0.82 (0.50–1.34) 0% 0.59
CT vs. TT 0.28 1.85 (0.61–5.61) 0% 0.32
TT vs. CC 0.34 0.60 (0.21–1.72) 24% 0.25
CC vs. CT + TT 0.81 0.95 (0.59–1.51) 0% 0.43
CT vs. CC + TT 0.45 1.21 (0.74–1.98) 0% 0.88
TT vs. CC + CT 0.31 0.58 (0.21–1.65) 23% 0.26
C vs. T 0.88 0.95 (0.51–1.76) 54% 0.14
H, Prostate cancer (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.87 1.07 (0.48–2.41) 78% 0.03
CT vs. TT 0.004 1.48 (1.14–1.92) 0% 0.43
TT vs. CC 0.0009 0.48 (0.31–0.74) 0% 0.43
CC vs. CT + TT 0.52 1.31 (0.57–3.01) 82% 0.02
CT vs. CC + TT 0.02 1.33 (1.05–1.69) 0% 0.66
TT vs. CC + CT 0.0004 0.64 (0.50–0.82) 0% 0.90
C vs. T 0.20 1.29 (0.87–1.90) 66% 0.09
I, Breast cancer (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.05 1.21 (1.00–1.46) 21% 0.26
CT vs. TT 0.18 1.46 (0.84–2.54) 0% 0.61
TT vs. CC 0.04 0.56 (0.33–0.97) 0% 0.91
CC vs. CT + TT 0.02 1.25 (1.04–1.51) 7% 0.30
CT vs. CC + TT 0.07 0.84 (0.70–1.02) 21% 0.26
TT vs. CC + CT 0.06 0.60 (0.35–1.02) 0% 0.82
C vs. T 0.007 1.25 (1.06–1.47) 0% 0.41
J, Bladder cancer (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.32 1.26 (0.80–1.99) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.38 0.92 (0.76–1.11) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.51 0.86 (0.56–1.34) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.43 1.19 (0.77–1.85) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.33 0.91 (0.75–1.10) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.54 1.06 (0.88–1.28) NA NA
C vs. T 0.81 0.98 (0.84–1.15) NA NA
K, Brain tumor (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.06 1.35 (0.99–1.83) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.35 0.66 (0.28–1.58) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.20 1.76 (0.75–4.14) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.08 1.30 (0.97–1.74) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.05 0.74 (0.55–1.00) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.64 1.23 (0.53–2.86) NA NA
C vs. T 0.17 1.20 (0.93–1.55) NA NA
L, Testicular tumor (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.31 0.87 (0.66–1.14) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.66 1.21 (0.51–2.85) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.91 0.95 (0.41–2.20) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.35 0.88 (0.67–1.15) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.30 1.15 (0.88–1.52) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.84 0.92 (0.40–2.12) NA NA
C vs. T 0.43 0.91 (0.72–1.15) NA NA
M, Leukemia (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.005 5.35 (1.64–17.47) NA NA
CT vs. TT NA NA NA NA
TT vs. CC NA NA NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.01 4.67 (1.42–15.31) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.005 0.19 (0.06–0.61) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT NA 1.11 (0.86–1.44) NA NA
C vs. T 0.06 1.97 (0.96–4.02) NA NA
N, Renal cell carcinoma (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.11 0.63 (0.36–1.11) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.55 0.93 (0.73–1.18) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.06 1.71 (0.99–2.95) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.06 0.60 (0.35–1.03) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.76 0.96 (0.76–1.22) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.26 1.14 (0.91–1.44) NA NA
C vs. T 0.10 0.85 (0.70–1.03) NA NA
O, Caucasian (n=15a)
CC vs. CT 0.85 0.98 (0.75–1.27) 81% 0.00001
CT vs. TT 0.03 0.82 (0.68–0.98) 46% 0.03
TT vs. CC 0.84 1.03 (0.81–1.30) 0% 0.50
CC vs. CT + TT 0.56 1.07 (0.85–1.34) 77% 0.00001
CT vs. CC + TT 0.02 0.79 (0.66–0.96) 64% 0.0003
TT vs. CC + CT 0.10 0.83 (0.67–1.04) 4% 0.41
C vs. T 0.84 1.03 (0.80–1.33) 90% 0.00001
P, Asian (n=12a)
CC vs. CT 0.26 1.22 (0.87–1.72) 71% 0.00001
CT vs. TT 0.11 0.90 (0.79–1.02) 47% 0.04
TT vs. CC 0.38 0.83 (0.54–1.27) 80% 0.00001
CC vs. CT + TT 0.34 1.19 (0.83–1.72) 77% 0.00001
CT vs. CC + TT 0.006 0.89 (0.82–0.97) 36% 0.11
TT vs. CC + CT 0.62 1.04 (0.89–1.21) 66% 0.0007
C vs. T 0.90 1.01 (0.87–1.18) 80% 0.00001

Number of articles. Significant associations are denoted in bold font. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable.

Characteristics of subjects included in the meta-analysis of inteleukin-4 rs2070874 polymorphism and cancer risk.

Case Control
First author, year Country Ethnicity Cancer type n Genotypes CC/CT/TT Alleles C/T (%) n Genotypes CC/CT/TT Alleles C/T (%) P-value HWE NOS score (Ref.)
Amirzargar, 2005 Iran Caucasian Leukemia 30 20/5/5 75.0/25.0 40 22/18/0 77.5/22.5 0.066 7 (42)
Chang, 2015 Taiwan Asian Lung cancer 358 238/101/19 80.6/19.4 716 453/223/40 78.8/21.2 0.075 7 (35)
Crusius, 2008 Netherlands Caucasian Gastric cancer 243 159/77/7 81.3/18.7 1160 839/296/25 85.1/14.9 0.853 8 (11)
Gaur, 2011 India Caucasian Oral carcinoma 140 20/61/59 36.1/63.9 120 11/38/71 25.0/75.0 0.088 8 (28)
Gu, 2008 USA Mixed Skin cancer 217 160/52/5 85.7/14.3 214 165/43/6 87.1/12.9 0.132 8 (45)
Lu, 2010 China Asian Gastric cancer 1042 27/271/744 15.6/84.4 1099 24/332/743 17.3/82.7 0.062 7 (44)
Lu, 2014 China Asian Hepatocellular cancer 135 8/43/84 21.9/78.1 147 4/45/98 18.0/82.0 0.664 7 (31)
Purdue, 2007 USA Mixed Testicular germ cell tumor 501 364/128/9 85.4/14.6 598 447/139/12 86.4/13.6 0.757 8 (40)
Schonfeld, 2010 USA Mixed Breast cancer 818 600/206/12 85.9/14.1 1081 763/288/30 83.9/16.1 0.654 7 (21)
Shamran, 2014 Iraq Caucasian Brain tumor 100 71/26/3 84.0/16.0 40 22/13/5 71.3/28.7 0.191 8 (43)
Wiemels, 2007 USA Mixed Brain tumor 386 281/93/12 84.8/15.2 471 328/134/9 83.9/16.1 0.267 8 (39)

Significant associations are denoted in bold font. HWE, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.

Subgroup analyses for interleukin-4 rs2070874polymorphism and cancer risk.

A, Gastric cancer (n=3a)
Variable P-value OR (95% Cl) I-square (%) P-value for the heterogeneity
CC vs. CT 0.91 1.03 (0.60–1.76) 59% 0.09
CT vs. TT 0.07 0.85 (0.71–1.01) 0% 0.52
TT vs. CC 0.67 0.91 (0.59–1.41) 25% 0.26
CC vs. CT + TT 0.94 1.02 (0.60–1.74) 60% 0.08
CT vs. CC + TT 0.85 1.04 (0.72–1.49) 75% 0.85
TT vs. CC + CT 0.11 1.15 (0.97–1.36) 5% 0.35
C vs. T 0.35 0.90 (0.72–1.12) 53% 0.12
B, Brain tumor (n=2a)
CC vs. CT 0.10 1.27 (0.95–1.70) 0% 0.55
CT vs. TT 0.86 1.17 (0.19–7.13) 75% 0.05
TT vs. CC 0.62 0.59 (0.07–4.70) 82% 0.02
CC vs. CT + TT 0.11 1.25 (0.95–1.65) 41% 0.19
CT vs. CC + TT 0.30 0.52 (0.15–1.77) 78% 0.03
TT vs. CC + CT 0.67 0.65 (0.09–4.74) 81% 0.02
C vs. T 0.29 1.42 (0.74–2.73) 75% 0.05
C, Leukemia (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.05 3.27 (1.02–10.45) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.02 0.03 (0.00–0.57) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.10 12.07 (0.63–232.12) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.33 1.64 (0.61–4.37) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.02 0.24 (0.08–0.77) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.06 17.47 (0.93–329.53) NA NA
C vs. T 0.73 0.87 (0.40–1.91) NA NA
D, Lung cancer (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.30 1.16 (0.87–1.54) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.88 0.95 (0.53–1.73) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.73 0.90 (0.51–1.60) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.30 1.15 (0.88–1.50) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.32 0.87 (0.66–1.15) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.85 0.95 (0.54–1.66) NA NA
C vs. T 0.35 1.11 (0.89–1.39) NA NA
E, Oral carcinoma (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.77 1.13 (0.49–2.62) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.02 1.93 (1.13–3.29) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.06 0.46 (0.20–1.03) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.21 1.65 (0.76–3.60) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.05 1.67 (1.00–2.77) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.006 0.50 (0.31–0.82) NA NA
C vs. T 0.007 1.69 (1.16–2.48) NA NA
F, Breast cancer (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.37 1.10 (0.89–1.35) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.10 1.79 (0.89–3.58) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.05 0.51 (0.26–1.00) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.18 1.15 (0.94–1.41) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.47 0.93 (0.75–1.14) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.06 0.52 (0.27–1.03) NA NA
C vs. T 0.08 1.17 (0.98–1.40) NA NA
G, Testicular tumor (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.38 0.88 (0.67–1.17) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.65 1.23 (0.50–3.01) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.85 0.92 (0.38–2.21) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.43 0.90 (0.69–1.18) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.38 1.13 (0.86–1.49) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.80 0.89 (0.37–2.14) NA NA
C vs. T 0.53 0.93 (0.73–1.18) NA NA
H, Skin cancer (n=1a)
CC vs. CT 0.35 0.80 (0.51–1.27) NA NA
CT vs. TT 0.56 1.45 (0.41–5.08) NA NA
TT vs. CC 0.81 0.86 (0.26–2.87) NA NA
CC vs. CT + TT 0.42 0.83 (0.54–1.29) NA NA
CT vs. CC + TT 0.33 1.25 (0.79–1.98) NA NA
TT vs. CC + CT 0.74 0.82 (0.25–2.72) NA NA
C vs. T 0.54 0.88 (0.60–1.31) NA NA
I, Caucasian (n=4a)
CC vs. CT 0.48 1.25 (0.67–2.33) 66% 0.03
CT vs. TT 0.78 1.16 (0.41–3.29) 70% 0.02
TT vs. CC 0.67 0.78 (0.24–2.51) 72% 0.01
CC vs. CT + TT 0.40 1.30 (0.71–2.38) 70% 0.02
CT vs. CC + TT 0.92 0.97 (0.55–1.73) 73% 0.01
TT vs. CC + CT 0.68 0.80 (0.28–2.27) 73% 0.01
C vs. T 0.45 1.23 (0.71–2.13) 83% 0.0006
J, Asian (n=3a)
CC vs. CT 0.12 1.22 (0.95–1.56) 0% 0.77
CT vs. TT 0.07 0.86 (0.72–1.01) 0% 0.49
TT vs. CC 0.35 0.83 (0.57–1.22) 0% 0.54
CC vs. CT + TT 0.15 1.19 (0.94–1.51) 0% 0.58
CT vs. CC + TT 0.03 0.85 (0.73–0.98) 0% 0.61
TT vs. CC + CT 0.17 1.12 (0.95–1.32) 15% 0.17
C vs. T 0.81 1.03 (0.83–1.26) 54% 0.11

Number of articles. Significant associations are denoted in bold font. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable.

Characteristics of subjects included in the meta-analysis of interleukin-4 rs79071878 polymorphism and cancer risk.

Case Control
First author, year Country Ethnicity Cancer type n Genotypes RP1.1/RP1.2/RP2.2 Alleles RP1.1/RP2.2 (%) n Genotypes RP1.1/RP1.2/RP2.2 Alleles RP1.1/RP2.2 (%) P-value HWE NOS score (Refs.)
Bozdoğan, 2015 Turkey Caucasian Bladder cancer 100 9/29/62 40.0/60.0 102 0/23/79 38.7/61.3 0.199 7 (48)
Chen, 2006 China Asian Gastric cancer 151 100/45/6 81.1/18.9 107 81/23/3 86.4/13.6 0.393 7 (46)
Hsieh, 2007 Taiwan Asian Leiomyoma 162 105/53/4 81.2/18.8 156 108/42/6 82.7/17.3 0.458 8 (27)
Kesarwani, 2008 India Caucasian Prostate cancer 200 126/69/5 80.3/19.7 202 130/62/10 79.7/20.3 0.465 8 (52)
Konwar, 2009 India Caucasian Breast cancer 100 10/37/53 28.5/71.5 200 18/53/129 22.3/77.7 0.001 7 (51)
Lai, 2005 Taiwan Asian Gastric cancer 123 82/38/3 82.1/17.9 103 66/33/4 80.1/19.9 0.961 7 (14)
Shekari, 2012 India Caucasian Cervical cancer 200 9/66/125 21.0/79.0 200 11/63/126 21.3/78.7 0.405 8 (50)
Tsai, 2005 Taiwan Asian Bladder cancer 138 119/18/1 92.8/7.2 105 67/33/5 79.5/20.5 0.720 7 (47)
Tsai, 2005 Taiwan Asian Oral carcinoma 121 97/30/3 88.8/11.2 105 67/33/5 47.7/52.3 0.720 7 (29)
Yang, 2014 Taiwan Asian Oral carcinoma 463 309/145/9 82.4/17.6 623 398/207/18 80.5/19.5 0.146 8 (53)
Yang, 2014 Taiwan Asian Pharyngeal carcinoma 129 87/39/3 82.6/17.4 623 398/207/18 80.5/19.5 0.146 8 (53)

Significant associations are denoted in bold font. Alleles of two and three repeats were designated as RP1 and RP2, respectively. Genotypes were designated as RP1.1=RP1/RP1, RP1.2=RP1/RP2 and RP2.2=RP2/RP2. RP, repeat; HWE, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.

Subgroup analyses for inteleukin-4 rs79071878polymorphism and cancer risk.

A, Bladder cancer (n=2a)
Variable P-value OR (95% Cl) I-square (%) P-value for the heterogeneity
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.56 1.09 (0.81–1.46) 8% 0.30
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.008 1.40 (1.09–1.79) 0% 0.65
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.006 0.62 (0.44–0.87) 0% 0.57
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/ RP2.2 0.30 1.17 (0.87–1.58) 35% 0.21
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.83 1.03 (0.81–1.13) 90% 0.002
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/ RP1.2 0.002 0.69 (0.55–0.88) 6% 0.30
RP1 vs. RP2 0.005 1.26 (1.00–1.58) 0% 0.44
B, Gastric cancer (n=2a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.36 0.83 (0.49–1.40) 40% 0.20
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.73 1.21 (0.42–3.50) 0% 0.68
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.94 1.04 (0.38–2.85) 0% 0.35
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.55 0.84 (0.48–1.48) 52% 0.15
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.35 1.21 (0.81–1.81) 30% 0.23
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.97 0.98 (0.36–2.69) 0% 0.43
RP1 vs. RP2 0.63 0.88 (0.52–1.47) 57% 0.13
C, Leiomyoma (n=1a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.29 0.77 (0.47–1.25) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.35 1.89 (0.50–7.15) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.57 0.69 (0.19–2.50) NA NA
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.40 0.82 (0.51–1.31) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.26 1.32 (0.81–2.14) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.49 0.63 (0.18–2.29) NA NA
RP1 vs. RP2 0.62 0.90 (0.60–1.35) NA NA
D, Oral carcinoma (n=1a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.12 1.59 (0.89–2.86) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.59 1.52 (0.33–6.89) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.24 0.41 (0.10–1.79) NA NA
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.07 1.67 (0.95–2.92) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.15 0.65 (0.37–1.17) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.36 0.51 (0.12–2.18) NA NA
RP1 vs. RP2 0.06 1.60 (0.99–2.60) NA NA
E, Prostate cancer (n=1a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.52 0.87 (0.57–1.33) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.16 2.23 (0.72–6.87) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.24 0.52 (0.17–1.55) NA NA
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.78 0.94 (0.63–1.42) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.42 1.19 (0.78–1.81) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.20 0.49 (0.17–1.47) NA NA
RP1 vs. RP2 0.85 1.03 (0.73–1.46) NA NA
F, Cervical cancer (n=1a)
Variable P-value OR (95% Cl) I-square (%) P-value for the heterogeneity
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.61 0.78 (0.30–2.01) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.80 1.06 (0.69–1.61) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.68 1.21 (0.49–3.03) NA NA
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.65 0.81 (0.33–2.00) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.75 1.07 (0.70–1.63) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.92 0.98 (0.65–1.47) NA NA
RP1 vs. RP2 0.93 0.99 (0.70–1.38) NA NA
G, Breast cancer (n=1a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.61 0.80 (0.33–1.92) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.05 1.70 (1.00–2.88) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.48 0.74 (0.32–1.71) NA NA
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.78 1.12 (0.50–2.53) NA NA
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.06 1.63 (0.98–2.72) NA NA
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.06 0.62 (038–1.01) NA NA
RP1 vs. RP2 0.09 1.39 (0.95–2.05) NA NA
H, Caucasian (n=4a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.74 0.94 (0.67–1.33) 24% 0.26
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.03 1.38 (1.04–1.83) 1% 0.39
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.05 0.61 (0.37–1.01) 49% 0.12
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.64 1.08 (0.78–1.50) 40% 0.17
RP1.2 vs. RP1.1/RP2.2 0.06 1.26 (0.99–1.59) 0% 0.63
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.01 0.71 (0.54–0.93) 37% 0.19
RP1 vs. RP2 0.13 1.30 (0.92–1.82) 66% 0.03
I, Asian (n=6a)
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2 0.41 1.17 (0.81–1.71) 72% 0.003
RP1.2 vs. RP2.2 0.14 1.46 (0.88–2.42) 0% 0.98
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1 0.05 0.62 (0.38–1.01) 0% 0.48
RP1.1 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.31 1.22 (0.83–1.81) 76% 0.0009
RP1.2 vs. RP1.2/RP2.2 0.46 0.87 (0.61–1.25) 70% 0.006
RP2.2 vs. RP1.1/RP1.2 0.07 0.64 (0.40–1.04) 0% 0.67
RP1 vs. RP2 0.23 1.23 (0.88–1.74) 76% 0.0008

Number of articles. Significant associations are denoted in bold font. Alleles of two and three repeats were designated as RP1 and RP2, respectively. Genotypes were designated as RP1.1=RP1/RP1, RP1.2=RP1/RP2 and RP2.2=RP2/RP2. RP, repeat; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable.