Cancer Genetics and Epigenetics 2019, Vol.7, No.1, 1-10
2
the accumulation of P53 protein was reported, as for NPC, TP53 mutation is a rare event, particularly in the
juvenile form (10e11). Instead, for NPC possible susceptibility factors would be polymorphisms of TP53.
The relation of the TP53 codon 72 polymorphism and NPC susceptibility have been studied in several previous
articles; but the results are not consistent. Zhuo et al. conducted a meta-analysis of five case-control studies and
showed that the TP53 codon 72 polymorphism could be a susceptibility factor for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in
2009 (Zhuo et al., 2009). Further, some more articles have been published recently. Best of our knowledge,
whether or not NPC susceptibility could have been increased by the TP53 codon 72 polymorphism remains
obviously uncertain. To clear the relation could give us better comprehend the possible risk of NPC and further
prevent carcinogenesis. For the reason, we do the meta analysis in order to get precise and latest evaluation of the
relation in the TP53 codon 72 polymorphism and NPC risk.
1 Results
1.1 Characteristics of the study
247 studies that met the included criteria were identified by our systematic literature search. Eventually, 9
case-control studies (Golovleva et al., 1997; Yung et al., 1997; Tsai et al., 2002; Tiwawech et al., 2003; Sousa et
al., 2006; Hadhri-Guiga et al., 2007; Xiao et al., 2010; Xie et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2014), which involved 1,588
NPC patients and 1,925 controls were included, after exclusion and deduplication of the obviously irrelevant
studies. The study selection process was showed in Figure 1. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics of the 9
studies.
Figure 1 Flow diagram of study selection
1.2 Meta-analysis results
Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 review the summary of the meta-analysis results, which shows the
relation in the P53 codon 72 polymorphism and NPC. The results exhibited that there was relative association
between P53 codon 72 polymorphism and nasopharyngeal carcinoma susceptibility, after we compared ArgArg vs.
ProPro, ArgPro vs. ProPro, (ArgPro + ArgArg) vs. ProPro, and ArgArg vs. (ProPro + ArgPro).
