Background
Methods
Strategy for literature search
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Data extraction
Methodological quality assessment
Statistical analysis
Results
Characteristics of the studies
Study ID | Year | Enrolled Country | Ethnicity | Age Range | Gender | Diagnosis | Diagnosis by | Genotyping Method | Control Source | Matching | Cases | Controls |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lv et al. [32] | 2009 | China | Chinese | N/D | N/D | IVDD | N/D | PCR-seq | N/D | N/D | 223 | 124 |
Zhu et al. [24] | 2011 | China | Chinese | 30–68 | both | IVDD | MRI | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | age, sex, occupation, smoking | 348 | 215 |
Sun et al. [19] | 2013 | China | Chinese | N/D& | both | IVDD | MRI | PCR-seq | participants with nonspine-related problems | age, sex, race | 472 | 528 |
Zhang et al. [23] | 2013 | China | Chinese | 33–61 | both | IVDD | MRI | PCR-seq | patients or participants without back pain | race, sex, age, living areas | 129 | 132 |
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | Turkey | Caucasoid | 43–70 | both | OA | ACR | PCR-seq | patients without OA related disease | N/D | 148 | 102 |
Coakley et al. [25] | 1999 | UK | Caucasoid | 24–87 | both | RA | ACR | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | age | 18 | 128 |
Huang et al. [26] | 1999 | Australia | Caucasoid | 23–65 | both | RA | ARA | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | N/D | 185 | 86 |
Lee et al. [28] | 2001 | Korea | Korean | 16–75 | both | RA | ACR | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | ethnically | 87 | 87 |
Mohammad- zadeh et al. [29] | 2012 | Iran | Caucasoid | 28–59 | both | RA | N/D | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | N/D | 120 | 112 |
Kobak et al. [27] | 2012 | Turkey | N/D | 19–72 | both | RA | ACR | PCR-seq | healthy subjects | age, sex | 101 | 105 |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | Turkey | Caucasoid | 20–80 | both | RA | ACR | PCR-seq | patients without musculoskeletal diseases | age,sex, ethnically | 100 | 101 |
Zhu et al. [31] | 2016 | China | Chinese | 40–70 | both | RA | ACR | N/D | patients without RA | age, sex | 839 | 615 |
Study ID | Year | Diagnosis | Ethnicity | Case Group | Control Group | PHWE | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAS (CD95) site
| |||||||||||
-670 G > A
rs1800682
| GG | GA | AA | GG | GA | AA | |||||
Lv et al. [32] | 2009 | IVDD | Chinese | 47 | 125 | 51 | 21 | 67 | 36 | 0.28 | |
Zhu et al. [24] | 2011 | IVDD | Chinese | 57 | 162 | 129 | 30 | 96 | 89 | 0.62 | |
Sun et al. [19] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 74 | 217 | 181 | 61 | 265 | 202 | 0.06 | |
Zhang et al. [23] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 20 | 59 | 49 | 14 | 68 | 50 | 0.19 | |
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | OA | Caucasoid | 27 | 63 | 58 | 21 | 46 | 35 | 0.41 | |
Coakley et al. [25] | 1999 | RA | Caucasoid | 4 | 8 | 6 | 31 | 61 | 36 | 0.61 | |
Huang et al. [26] | 1999 | RA | Caucasoid | 32 | 105 | 48 | 22 | 44 | 20 | 0.83 | |
Lee et al. [28] | 2001 | RA | Korean | 16 | 38 | 33 | 13 | 48 | 26 | 0.23 | |
Mohammadzadeh et al. [29] | 2012 | RA | Caucasoid | 17 | 64 | 39 | 18 | 50 | 44 | 0.55 | |
Kobak et al. [27] | 2012 | RA | N/D | 24 | 50 | 27 | 14 | 52 | 39 | 0.61 | |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | RA | Caucasoid | 20 | 45 | 35 | 22 | 40 | 39 | 0.06 | |
−1377 G > A
rs2234767
| GG | GA | AA | GG | GA | AA | |||||
Zhu et al. [24] | 2011 | IVDD | Chinese | 121 | 172 | 55 | 99 | 92 | 24 | 0.71 | |
Sun et al. [19] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 218 | 209 | 45 | 236 | 248 | 44 | 0.06 | |
Zhang et al. [23] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 59 | 55 | 14 | 56 | 65 | 11 | 0.19 | |
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | OA | Caucasoid | 95 | 51 | 2 | 42 | 60 | 0 | < 0.01 | |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | RA | Caucasoid | 74 | 26 | 0 | 81 | 18 | 2 | 0.41 | |
Zhu et al. [31] | 2016 | RA | Chinese | 246 | 284 | 68 | 389 | 357 | 85 | 0.82 | |
FASL (CD178) site
| |||||||||||
IVS2nt-124
A > G
rs5030772
| GG | GA | AA | GG | GA | AA | |||||
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | OA | Caucasoid | 4 | 37 | 107 | 4 | 30 | 68 | 0.76 | |
Mohammadzadeh et al. [29] | 2012 | RA | Caucasoid | 8 | 35 | 77 | 6 | 31 | 75 | 0.25 | |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | RA | Caucasoid | 6 | 25 | 68 | 10 | 29 | 60 | 0.03 | |
−844 T > C
rs763110
| CC | CT | TT | CC | CT | TT | |||||
Zhu et al. [24] | 2011 | IVDD | Chinese | 175 | 148 | 25 | 131 | 76 | 8 | 0.46 | |
Sun et al. [19] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 236 | 188 | 48 | 308 | 200 | 20 | 0.07 | |
Zhang et al. [23] | 2013 | IVDD | Chinese | 64 | 51 | 13 | 77 | 50 | 5 | 0.37 | |
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | OA | Caucasoid | 45 | 80 | 23 | 37 | 47 | 18 | 0.65 | |
Mohammadzadeh et al. [29] | 2012 | RA | Caucasoid | 33 | 63 | 24 | 43 | 49 | 20 | 0.36 | |
Kobak et al. [27] | 2012 | RA | N/D | 30 | 40 | 31 | 33 | 40 | 23 | 0.12 | |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | RA | Caucasoid | 20 | 55 | 25 | 31 | 54 | 14 | 0.22 | |
Zhu et al. [31] | 2016 | RA | Chinese | 331 | 228 | 34 | 453 | 317 | 51 | 0.65 |
Study ID | year | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | Sum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Huang et al. [26] | 1999 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
Coakley et al. [25] | 1999 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
Lee et al. [28] | 2001 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
Lv et al. [32] | 2009 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Zhu et al. [24] | 2011 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
Mohammadzadeh et al. [29] | 2011 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Kobak et al. [27] | 2012 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
Sun et al. [19] | 2013 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
Zhang et al. [23] | 2013 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
Sezgin et al. [22] | 2013 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Seyfi et al. [30] | 2013 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
Zhu et al. [31] | 2016 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
Association between Fas (rs1800682) polymorphism and MSDD risk
Association between Fas (rs2234767) polymorphism and MSDD risk
Association between FasL (rs5030772) polymorphism and MSDD risk
Association between FasL (rs763110) polymorphism and MSDD risk
Sensitivity analysis
Publication bias
Comparisons | Egger’s test | Begg’s test | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
t
| 95% CI | P value | P value | |
allele model | −0.58 | (−2.91,1.72) | 0.576 | 0.436 |
homozygote model | −0.53 | (−3.70,2.29) | 0.609 | 0.640 |
heterozygote model | 0.41 | (−1.56,2.24) | 0.694 | 0.876 |
dominant model | 0.05 | (−2.03,2.11) | 0.965 | 0.640 |
recessive model | −0.69 | (−3.82,2.03) | 0.508 | 1.000 |