Association of the WNT3 polymorphisms and non-syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate: evidence from a meta-analysis

Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in WNT Genes in Patients with Non-Syndromic Orofacial Clefts in a Polish Population

Non-syndromic orofacial cleft (OFC) is the most common facial developmental defect in the global population. The etiology of these birth defects is complex and multifactorial, involving both genetic and environmental factors. This study aimed to determine if SNPs in the WNT gene family (rs1533767, rs708111, rs3809857, rs7207916, rs12452064) are associated with OFCs in a Polish population. The study included 627 individuals: 209 children with OFCs and 418 healthy controls. DNA was extracted from saliva for the study group and from umbilical cord blood for the control group. Polymorphism genotyping was conducted using quantitative PCR. No statistically significant association was found between four variants and clefts, with odds ratios for rs708111 being 1.13 (CC genotype) and 0.99 (CT genotype), for rs3809857 being 1.05 (GT genotype) and 0.95 (TT genotype), for rs7207916 being 0.86 (AA genotype) and 1.29 (AG genotype) and for rs12452064 being 0.97 (AA genotype) and 1.24 (AG genotype). However, the rs1533767 polymorphism in WNT showed a statistically significant increase in OFC risk for the GG genotype (OR = 1.76, p < 0.001). This research shows that the rs1533767 polymorphism in the WNT gene is an important risk marker for OFC in the Polish population.

Evidence Mapping and Quality Analysis of Systematic Reviews on Various Aspects Related to Cleft Lip and Palate

BACKGROUND

Management of cleft lip and palate is interdisciplinary. An evidence-mapping approach was envisaged to highlight the existing gaps in this field, using only the highest level of evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct evidence mapping and quality analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to any aspect of cleft lip and palate.

SEARCH METHODS

The cleft lip and palate field was divided into 9 domains and 50 subdomains and a method of categorization of systematic reviews was established. A comprehensive search strategy was carried out in seven databases along with the search of gray literature and references of included articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Systematic reviews related to any aspect of cleft lip and palate, conducted by a minimum of two reviewers, with a comprehensive search strategy and adequate quality analysis were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A self-designed, pre-piloted data-extraction sheet was used to collect information that was analyzed through an expert group discussion. Quality analysis was performed using ROBIS-I, AMSTAR 2, and the PRISMA checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 144 systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2022 were included. The largest number of these could be categorized in the therapeutic domain (n = 58). A total of 27% of the studies were categorized as inconclusive, 40% as partially conclusive, and 33% as conclusive. As per ROBIS-I, 77% of reviews had high risk of bias while 58% were graded as critically low in quality as per AMSTAR 2. The majority of systematic reviews showed low reporting errors.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of systematic reviews related to cleft lip and palate relate to therapeutic and prognostic domains and show high risk of bias and critically low quality regardless of the source journal. The results of this paper might serve as a starting point encouraging authors to carry out high-quality research where evidence is lacking.

REGISTRATION

A multidisciplinary expert-group formulated an a priori protocol, registered in Open Science Framework (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/NQDV2).

Association of BMP4 rs17563 Polymorphism with Nonsyndromic Cleft Lip with or without Cleft Palate Risk: Literature Review and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

Although published individual studies have reported associations between BMP4 rs17563 polymorphism and nonsyndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (NSCLP) risk, the results are conflicting. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the association based on multiple studies. Methods: A comprehensive literature search up to October 1st, 2019 was performed using PubMed, Science Direct, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases. Results: Fourteen case-control studies with 2,058 NSCLP cases and 2,557 controls were selected. There was no significant association between BMP4 rs17563 polymorphism and risk of NSCLP overall. Subgroup analysis revealed that BMP4 rs17563 polymorphism was associated with NSCLP risk in Chinese and Brazilian populations. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that BMP4 rs17563 polymorphism was not associated with NSCLP risk in overall population. However, BMP4 rs17563 polymorphism may be a risk factor for development of NSCLP in Chinese and Brazilians.