Statistical analysis Age is presented as median and interquartile

Statistical analysis Age is presented as median and interquartile range (IQR) because the data showed departures from normality (according to Shapiro-Wilk’s

test). The χ2 method was used to test frequencies of genotypes/allele in prostate cancer patients and learn more controls. 7-Cl-O-Nec1 price The strength of the nominal association in the contingency tables is reflected by Cramér’s (V) coefficient of contingency. The odds ratios (OR), estimates of the relative risk, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed to assess strengths of association of the genotypes with prostate cancer. All p values cited are two-sided alternatives; differences resulting in a p value of less or equal to 0.05 were declared statistically significant [16]. The Hardy Weinberg equilibrium was tested for the genotype proportions in the control group, as a measure for quality control. Results Since previous reports suggested that there are no differences in GSTM1, GSTT1 and GSTP1 allele frequencies in relation to age and sex [17], we conducted a retrospective study on a selected population of men in order to examine whether the gene frequencies were consistent with research findings Depsipeptide nmr across Europe. Statistical analysis of data collected from a survey of community sample in the north-western part of Slovakia showed

that our estimates were not significantly different from either those found in the Caucasian population of Garte and co-workers [1] (Table 2) or those found previously by a research group in Slovakia [1] (Table 3). Table 2 Distribution of GSTP1, GSTT1 and GSTM1 genotypes in our control group

and in Caucasian population (GSEC project-Genetic Susceptibility to Environmental Carcinogens) published by Garte and co-workers [1]. Polymorphism Our control group Number (%) of subjects Caucasians-GSEC Number (%) of subjects 95% CI for proportion difference Cramér’s V p-value GSTP1           No. 228 1137       Ile/Ile 110 (48.2) 498 (43.8) -0.03 to 0.12 0.033 0.22 Ile/Val+Val/Val 118 (51.8) 561 (49.3) -0.05 to 0.09 0.018 0.51 GSTT1           No. 228 5577       positive 183 (80.3) 4774 (80.2)       null 45 (19.7) 1103 (19.8) -0.05 to 0.06 0.005 0.99 GSTM1           No. 228 10514       positive 98 (43.0) 4931 (46.9) Quinapyramine       null 130 (57.0) 5583 (53.1) -0.03 to 0.10 0.011 0.24 Table 3 Distribution of GSTT1 and GSTM1 genotypes in our control group and in Slovak population (GSEC project-Genetic Susceptibility to Environmental Carcinogens) published by Garte and co-workers [1]. Polymorphism Our control group Number (%) of subjects Slovak population-GSEC Number (%) of subjects 95% CI for proportion difference Cramér’s V p-value GSTT1           No. 228 332       positive 183 (80.3) 272 (82.0)       null 45 (19.7) 60 (18.0) -0.05 to 0.09 0.021 0.62 GSTM1           No. 228 332       positive 98 (43.0) 162 (48.8)       null 130 (57.0) 170 (51.2) -0.03 to 0.14 -0.057 0.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>