English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Epidemiological studies about the association between genetic polymorphisms in  TNFA, TNFB , and  IFNG  and the risk for multiple sclerosis (MS) have been performed extensively. However, the results are inconclusive. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the contribution of the polymorphisms in  TNFA, TNFB , and  IFNG  to the susceptibility of MS. The PubMed, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched to identify relevant studies up to October 2021. A meta-analysis was performed, and pooled odds ratios (OR) and confidence intervals (CI) were computed using fixed or random effects models. A marginally significant association of the  IFNG  +874AT genotype with high risk of MS was observed in a heterozygous comparison (OR = 1.51, 95% CI, 1.02–2.23). However, no significant association between the  TNFA  (–308 G/A, – 238 G/A, and – 376 G/A) and  TNFB  +252A/G polymorphisms and MS risk was observed both in overall analysis and in subgroup analysis. This meta-analysis provides evidence that the  TNFA  (–308 G/A, – 238 G/A, and – 376 G/A) and  TNFB  +252A/G polymorphisms were not risk factors for the occurrence of MS. Further studies with larger samples are necessary to reach the concise results about the contribution of other polymorphisms to the risk of MS.

Lack of association between TNFA and TNFB polymorphisms and the risk of multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis from 37 studies