p. 4739−4743
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4745−4751
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4753−4758
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4759−4763
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4765−4771
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4773−4780
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4781−4786
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4787−4793
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4795−4800
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
1000 subjects). Limiting the analysis to the studies within Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, the results were persistent and robust. No publication bias was found in the present study. Conclusions: This updated meta-analysis suggests that the VDR BsmI polymorphism may be associated with a moderate protective effect against CRC.]]>
p. 4801−4807
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4809−4813
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4815−4821
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
T Polymorphism and Breast Cancer Susceptibility: a Meta-analysis]]>
T polymorphism and susceptibility for breast cancer, we performed a meta-analysis to investigate the issue. Materials and Methods: An internet search of PubMed and EMBASE wasperformed to identify eligible studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate any association between MMP-2 -1306C>T polymorphism and breast cancer susceptibility. Results: Nine case-control studies were included in the meta-analysis, involving 9,858 cases and 10,871 controls. Overall, there was no evidence of any association between the MMP-2 -1306C>T polymorphism and breast cancer susceptibility in different genetic models (T-allele vs C-allele: OR=0.95, 95%CI, 0.82-1.10, p=0.49; TT vs CC: OR=1.03, 95%CI, 0.90-1.19, p=0.66; TT+TC vs CC: OR=0.93, 95%CI, 0.78-1.10, p=0.38; TT vs TC+CC: OR=1.02, 95%CI, 0.89-1.17, p=0.77). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, CC was associated witha significant increase in breast susceptibility among Latin-Americans in the dominant model (OR=0.61, 95%CI,0.40-0.93, p=0.02), but the association disappeared in other models. No significant association was observed among Europeans, East Asians and others in different genetic models. In the subgroup analysis by their source of controls, no significant association between MMP-2 -1306C>T polymorphism and breast cancer susceptibility was noted among population-based studies and hospital-based studies in different genetic models. Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that MMP-2 -1306C>T polymorphism is not associated with breast cancer susceptibility, although the association among Latin-Americans in the dominant model was significant.]]>
p. 4823−4827
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
12 months of breastfeeding subgroups were 0.85 (95% CI: 0.77-0.93), 0.73 (95% CI: 0.65-0.82) and 0.64 (95%CI: 0.56-0.73), respectively. Meta-regressionof total breastfeeding duration indicated an increasing linear trend of risk reduction of ovarian cancer with the increasing total breastfeeding duration (p = 0.00). Breastfeeding was inversely associated with the risk of ovarian cancer, especially long-term breastfeeding duration that demonstrated a stronger protective effect.]]>
p. 4829−4837
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4839−4842
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4843−4846
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4847−4849
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4851−4856
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4857−4860
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4861−4864
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4865−4869
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4871−4876
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4877−4883
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4885−4891
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4893−4896
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4897−4902
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4903−4907
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4909−4913
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4915−4918
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4919−4923
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
0.05). With chemotherapy, RASSF1A and CDH13 promoter region methylation rate in 42 cases of patients showed a declining trend. Conclusions: The methylation level of RASSF1A and CDH13 gene promoter region can reflect drug sensitivity of tumors to individualized treatment.]]>
p. 4925−4928
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4929−4932
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4933−4938
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4939−4944
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4945−4950
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4951−4956
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4957−4961
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4963−4968
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4969−4976
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4977−4982
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4983−4988
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4989−4994
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 4995−5000
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5001−5007
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5009−5018
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5019−5022
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5023−5028
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5029−5034
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
90% in most countries). In contrast, there was relatively low awareness about harmful effects of smokeless tobacco (< 90% in all countries except India and Bangladesh), and observed correlation of smoking tobacco with heart attack (40.6% in China, 65.1% in India) and stroke (28.2% in China, 50.5% in India). Conclusions: A large proportion of adults living in low and middle income countries possess adequate knowledge about smoking tobacco but have inadequate awareness as well as false perceptions about smokeless forms of tobacco. Popular beliefs of inverse relationships of tobacco consumption with knowledge, attitudes and perception of populations towards tobacco are challenged by the findings of this study]]>
p. 5035−5042
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5043−5047
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5049−5053
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5055−5061
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5063−5069
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5071−5076
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5077−5081
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5083−5088
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5089−5095
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5097−5105
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12
p. 5107−5110
2476-762X
Vol.15/No.12