Background
Materials and methods
Selection of studies
Data extraction
Quality assessment of the studies
Meta-analysis
Results
Included studies
First author | PY | [R] | Country | Ethnic group | Sample size | Type of ovarian response | Used HWE | Addressed LD | Tissue source | Genotyping | CBS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Daelemans | 2004 | [36] | Belgium | NHC | 229 | Hyper/controls | No | Yes | blood | DNA sequencing | 4 |
Klinkert | 2006 | [38] | Nether-lands | NHC | 105 | Poor, not poor | No | Yes | blood | Taqman | 5 |
Livshyts | 2009 | [39] | Ukraine | NHC | 374 | poor, good/controls | Yes | Yes | blood | PCR-RFLP | 5 |
Boudjenah | 2012 | [1] | France | NHC | 427 | poor, hyper/controls | Yes | Yes | blood | Multiplex PCR | 7 |
Binder | 2012 | [42] | Germany | NHC | 259 | low, control | No | No | blood | RT-QPCR | 6 |
Mohiyiddeen | 2013 | [40] | United Kingdom | NHC | 504 | poor, normal, hyper | Yes | Yes | blood | Taqman | 5 |
de Castro | 2003 | [37] | Spain | HC | 102 | poor, good | Yes | Yes | blood | RT-QPCR | 5 |
de Castro | 2004 | [13] | Spain | HC | 170 | poor, rest of patients, high | Yes | No | blood | RT-QPCR | 8 |
Huang | 2014 | [4] | China | Asian | 1,250 | Poor, good responders | Yes | Yes | blood | MALDI-TOF | 8 |
Achrekar | 2009 | [35] | India | Asian | 150 | Hyper, not hyper | Yes | No | blood | RT-QPCR | 5 |
Yan | 2013 | [41] | China | Asian | 450 | Poor, not poor, hyper, not hyper | Yes | Yes | blood | RT-QPCR | 6 |
Overall and subgroup analysis
S allele | N allele | NS genotype | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | ||||||||||||||
N | OR | 95% CI | pA | pB | I2 | AM | OR | 95% CI | pA | pB | I2 | AM | OR | 95% CI | pA | pB | I2 | AM | |
Poor responders | |||||||||||||||||||
All | 11 | 1.61 | 0.94-2.74 | 0.08 | <0.0001 | 80 | R | 0.95 | 0.66-1.37 | 0.78 | 0.002 | 65 | R | 0.93 | 0.60-1.46 | 0.75 | <0.0001 | 80 | R |
Outliers omitted | -- | 0.90 | 0.66-1.23 | 0.52* | 0.16 | 36 | F | 1.02 | 0.82-1.26 | .88** | 0.10 | 42 | F | 0.82 | 0.66-1.02 | .08*** | 0.78 | 0 | F |
NHC | 7 | 1.24 | 0.76-2.05 | 0.39 | 0.03 | 57 | R | 0.99 | 0.60-1.62 | 0.97 | 0.009 | 65 | R | 0.88 | 0.69-1.13 | 0.32 | 0.79 | 0 | F |
Hyper-responders | |||||||||||||||||||
All | 6 |
1.47
|
1.05-2.04
|
0.02
| 0.23 | 28 | F |
0.64
|
0.46-0.88
|
0.007
| 0.19 | 32 | F | 1.10 | 0.83-1.46 | 0.50 | 0.37 | 7 | F |
NHC | 4 |
1.57
|
1.11-2.23
|
0.01
| 0.33 | 13 | F | 0.68 | 0.38-1.20 | 0.18 | 0.07 | 57 | R | 1.03 | 0.76-1.40 | 0.83 | 0.69 | 0 | F |
Outlier analysis
Sensitivity analysis
Original summary effects | Resulting pooled OR | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OR | 95% CI | Nature of association | Omitted study [ref] | OR | 95% CI | Effect of study omission |
NN genotype poor response overall
| ||||||
0.95 | 0.66-1.37 | no associations | Livshyts C [39] | 1.05 | 0.75-1.48 | slight likelihood of N carriers being poor responders |
0.95 | 0.66-1.37 | no associations | Yan [41] | 1.03 | 0.70-1.50 | slight likelihood of N carriers being poor responders |
SS genotype poor response NHC
| ||||||
1.24 | 0.76-2.05 | S carriers likely to be poor responders | Livshyts C [39] | 0.98 | 0.71-1.36 | no associations |
NN genotype poor response NHC
| ||||||
0.99 | 0.60-1.62 | no associations | Livshyts C [39] | 1.23 | 0.93-1.64 | likelihood of N carriers being poor responders |
0.99 | 0.60-1.62 | no associations | Livshyts G [39] | 1.12 | 0.69-1.82 | likelihood of N carriers being poor responders |
NS genotype hyper-response NHC
| ||||||
1.03 | 0.76-1.40 | no associations | Daelemans [36] | 0.90 | 0.60-1.34 | slight likelihood of NS carriers being non-hyper-responders |