Association between EGF +61A/G polymorphism and gastric cancer in Caucasians

Table 1 Associations between EGF +61A/G variants and clinicopathological parameters in patients with gastric lesions¹n (%)

	Cases	Controls	OR (95% CI)	P
Gastric lesions1 (n = 207)
Genotypes
GG	38 (18.4)	231 (23.5)	1
GA	104 (50.2)	449 (45.6)	1.41 (0.92-2.15)	0.096
AA	65 (31.4)	304 (30.9)	1.30 (0.82-2.06)	0.237
GA + AA	169 (68.6)	753 (76.5)	1.36 (0.92-2.04)	0.109
Atrophy or intestinal metaplasia (n = 45)
Genotypes
GG	9 (20.0)	231 (23.5)	1
GA	20 (44.4)	449 (45.6)	1.44 (0.49-2.76)	0.743
AA	16 (35.6)	304 (30.9)	1.35 (0.55-3.37)	0.478
GA + AA	36 (80.0)	753 (76.5)	1.23 (0.56-2.78)	0.590
Gastric adenocarcinoma (n = 162)
Genotypes
GG	29 (17.9)	231 (23.5)	1
GA	84 (51.9)	449 (45.6)	1.49 (0.93-2.40)	0.082
AA	49 (30.2)	304 (30.9)	1.28 (0.77-2.16)	0.317
GA + AA	133 (82.1)	753 (76.5)	1.41 (0.90-2.21)	0.116

¹Gastric lesions: atrophy or intestinal metaplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma. OR: Odds ratios; CI: Confidence intervals.

Table 2 Associations between EGF +61A/G variants and gender

		Controls	Cases	OR (95%CI)	P
GG	M	117	14	1
	F	114	15	1.04 (0.45-2.41)	0.913
AA/AG	M	343	75	1
	F	410	58	0.65 (0.44-0.95)	0.021

OR: Odds ratios; CI: Confidence intervals.

Table 3 Genotype distribution of EGF +61A/G polymorphism in different control populations reported in different case-control studies n (%)

	n	Genotype
		AA	AG	GG
Asia
Jin et al[30]	660	57 (8.6)	289 (43.8)	314 (47.6)
Goto et al[31]	454	47 (10.4)	188 (41.8)	215 (47.8)
Hamai et al[29]	230	25 (10.9)	97 (42.1)	108 (47.0)
Europe
Portugal (our data)	984	304 (30.9)	449 (45.6)	231 (23.5)
Shahbazi et al[10]	99	32 (32.3)	47 (47.5)	20 (20.2)
McCarron et al[32]	310	121 (39.0)	131 (42.3)	58 (18.7)
Costa et al[34]	570	173 (30.3)	266 (46.7)	131 (23.0)
Australia
James et al[33]	2646	883 (33.4)	1317 (49.8)	446 (16.9)