Association between Vitamin D receptor (VDR) polymorphisms and the risk of Multiple sclerosis (MS): An updated meta-analysis

doi:10.21203/rs.2.17139/v2

Background

The association between the vitamin D receptor ( VDR ) gene polymorphism and the risk of Multiple sclerosis (MS) has been evaluated in several studiese. However, the findings were inconsistent and inconclusive.Methods

All relevant studies reporting the association between the FokI (rs2228570) or/and TaqI (rs731236) or/and BsmI (rs1544410) or/and ApaI (rs7975232) polymorphisms of the VDR and susceptibility to multiple sclerosis published up to September 2019 were identified by comprehensive systematic database search in web of science, Scopus, and PubMed.Results

A total of 30 case–control studies were included in this meta-analysis. The overall results suggested a significant association between TaqI gene polymorphism and MS risk under heterozygote contrast (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.01–1.59, REM). Moreover, the pooled results of subgroup analysis decline presence of significant association under all defined genotype model. In subgroup analysis, BsmI gene polymorphism was associated with increased risk of MS under the recessive model in Asian population. In other hand, ApaI gene polymorphism was associated with decreased risk of MS under recessive and homozygote contrast (aa vs AA) models in Asian population.Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggested a significant association between TaqI gene polymorphism and MS susceptibility. Furthermore, BsmI gene polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of MS in Asian population. In contrast, ApaI gene polymorphism was associated with a decreased risk of MS in Asian population. Future large scale studies on gene–environment and gene– gene interactions are required to estimate related risk factors and assist early diagnosis of patients at high risk for MS.

Neurosurgery

Vitamin D receptor

Multiple sclerosis

Polymorphism

Meta-analysis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic and demyelinating disorder of the brain and spinal cord that mainly develops in young individuals [1, 2]. Tissue damage in MS results from a dynamic and complex interaction between the glia (oligodendrocytes and their precursors, astrocytes, and microglia), neurons, and immune system. Although there is an argument about whether the original cause of MS is extrinsic or intrinsic to the CNS, several researches in animal models in combination with evaluation of immune cells in humans have elucidated a fundamental function for adaptive immunity [3, 4]. It has been demonstrated that genetic and environmental factors play important roles in susceptibility to the disease [5]. Vitamin D is a group of fat-soluble secosteroids that have functional and regulatory effects in the body. Vitamin D has been implicated in the development of the brain and spinal cord. Alternatively, the active form of vitamin D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D has a wide anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties [6, 7]. Vitamin D exerts its immunomodulatory functions within the immune system by decreasing the presentation of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) II on T cells and monocytes. Vitamin D also reduces T cell proliferation and pro-inflammatory cytokine release [8]. The lower serum vitamin D levels compared to healthy controls have been reported in MS patients. Moreover, Vitamin D has positive effects in regulating MS risk development [9, 10]. The effects of Vitamin D on the immune system are exerted by binding to the nuclear Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) [11]. Particular variants of the VDR gene are related to changes in vitamin D metabolism and function [12]. Taken together, these results suggested that VDR may play an important role in the pathogenesis of MS.

The human VDR gene is located on the chromosome 12q12-14 and series of restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) in the human VDR gene have been reported, containing BsmI (rs1544410), ApaI (rs7975232), FokI (rs2228570), and TaqI (rs731236) restriction sites[13]. ApaI, BsmI, and TaqI are localized near the 3′-untranslated region (UTR) of the VDR gene in the intron between exons 8 and 9, and shown to be in strong linkage disequilibrium (LD) with each other [14]. The 3′-UTR of the VDR gene is involved in the regulation of gene expression by regulating the mRNA stability and expression level [15]. Polymorphism FokI is located at the translation starting codon [16].

The association between MS and VDR gene single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) has been investigated in several studies. Particularly, studies have evaluated associations between the most common SNPs of the VDR gene (TaqI, ApaI, FokI, and BsmI polymorphisms) and MS. While studies in Australia [17], Kuwait [18], and southeast of Iran [19] reported a significant association between TaqI, ApaI, and FokI polymorphisms and MS, other studies in Tunisia [20], Slovakia [21], and Greece [22] have failed to find such association. The reasons for this disparity may be small sample sizes, low statistical power, clinical heterogeneity, or a combination of these factors. To offset these limitations, this meta-analysis was performed to investigate whether VDR gene polymorphisms contribute to MS or not. Up to now, there are four meta-analysis which investigated the association between VDR polymorphisms and MS. The two studies performed by Huang et al.. [23], and Garcia-Martin et al.. [24] have indicated that there was no association between VDR gene polymorphism and MS risk. Nevertheless, the other meta-analysis by Zhang et al.. [25], and Tizaoui et al.. [26] demonstrated a significant association between ApaI and FokI and MS susceptibility. Since publishing of the last meta-analysis, seven new studies have been founded in electronic databases. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of all eligible published case-control studies to obtain an exact evaluation of the association between VDR gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to MS.

The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [27].

2.1.Publication search

All relevant studies reporting the association between the VDR gene FokI (rs2228570) or/and TaqI (rs731236) or/and BsmI (rs1544410) or/and ApaI (rs7975232) polymorphisms and susceptibility to MS published up to May 2019 were identified by comprehensive systematic search in the electronic database of web of science, Scopus, and PubMed. The following search terms were applied: (VDR” or “vitamin D receptor”) AND (“multiple sclerosis” OR “MS”) AND (“polymorphisms” OR “single nucleotide” OR “polymorphism” OR “SNP” OR “variation” OR “mutation”). As a complementary approach, in order to detect additional potentially relevant studies, manual evaluation of the reference list of the included eligible studies was performed. In this meta-analysis, the strategy of search was restricted solely to the English-language publications and human population.

2.2. Study selection

Two reviewers independently assessed titles and abstract of all studies retrieved in the initial search. Articles not following the eligibility criteria were excluded by applying a hierarchical approach based on study design. Full-text examination was applied if we could not decide include or exclude based on titles and abstract. In particular conditions, if an author has published more than one study by the same case series, the most recently published study was included. Any disagreements were discussed and resolved by consensus.

2.3. Eligibility criteria

Studies considered eligible if meet the following criteria: 1) All eligible case–control studies that evaluate the relationship between the VDR gene single nucleotide polymorphisms and the risk of MS as the main outcome; 2) Sufficient data are available to extract or calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI); 3) Contained genotypic or allelic distributions of case and healthy individuals for VDR gene polymorphism in the studies. The exclusion criteria were as follows: 1) Studies which genotype or allelic frequency could not be extracted; 2) Letters, case reports, reviews, comments, book chapter, and abstracts; 3) Duplicated reports and studies with repetitive subjects. The application of these criteria yielded 30 case–control studies eligible for the meta-analysis.

2.4. Data extraction

Two reviewers independently extracted all data according to standardized extraction form for the following data: The author's name, journal and year of publication, country of origin, ethnicity, number of cases and controls for every gender separately, mean or range of age, genotyping method, total sample size of cases and controls, and the number of cases and controls for each genotype. For quality assessment of the included publications, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was applied [28]. Studies with scores 0–3, 4–6 or 7–9 were of low, moderate or high-quality, respectively.

2.5. Statistical analysis

Deviation from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) for distribution of the allele frequencies was analyzed using Chi-Square test in control group. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the stability of the results by removing the studies not in HWE. The strength of association between the VDR gene FokI, TaqI, BsmI, and ApaI polymorphisms and susceptibility to MS was evaluated by OR and 95 % CI. Defined model for FokI, TaqI, BsmI, ApaI were as follow, respectively: FokI; dominant model (ff+Ff vs. FF), recessive model (ff vs. Ff+FF), allelic model (f vs. F), homozygote model (ff vs. FF), and heterozygote model (Ff vs. FF); TaqI; dominant model (tt+Tt vs. TT), recessive model (tt vs. Tt+TT), allelic model (t vs. T), homozygote model (tt vs. TT), and heterozygote model (Tt vs. TT); BsmI; dominant model (bb+Bb vs. BB), recessive model (bb vs. Bb+BB), allelic model (b vs. B), homozygote model (bb vs. BB), and heterozygote model (Bb vs. BB); ApaI; dominant model (aa+Aa vs. AA), recessive model (aa vs. Aa+AA), allelic model (a vs. A), homozygote model (aa vs. AA), and heterozygote model (Aa vs. AA). For each genetic model, subgroup analysis was applied to evaluate ethnicity effects. In consideration of the possibility of heterogeneity (between study variability) across included studies, chi-square based Q-test was used [29]. Additionally, to show possible heterogeneity quantitatively, the other index (I²) was calculated as the percentage of heterogeneity. There was significant heterogeneity if an I² values exceeded 50% or the Q statistic had a P value less than 0.1. In the presence of significant heterogeneity, the random effects model (DerSimonian–Laird approach) was performed. Otherwise, the fixed effects model (Mantel–Haenszel approach) was performed for combination of data [30, 31]. Visual inspection of asymmetry in funnel plots asymmetry, Begg's test, and Egger's test were conducted to evaluate publication bias (P value< 0.05 was considered statistically significant) [32, 33]. The data analyses were carried out using STATA (version 14.0; Stata Corporation, College Station, TX) and SPSS (version 23.0; SPSS, Inc. Chicago, IL).

3.1. Study characteristics

The primary search in web of science, Scopus, and PubMed databases yielded a total of 636 publications. After removal of duplicates and evaluation of title/abstract, only 76 studies remained for full-text examination. Eventually, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria and included for quantitative synthesis. The search workflow is shown in Figure 1. Study characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Among 30 eligible studies, 16 Studies investigated FokI SNP, 23 Studies TaqI SNP, 16 studies BsmI SNP and 20 Studies ApaI SNP. The studies were published between 1999 and 2019. Taq-Man and PCR-RFLP genotyping methods were used by the most studies.

3.2. Quantitative synthesis

The distributions of FokI, TaqI, BsmI and ApaI genotypes of the included studies are shown in Table 2. FF for FokI SNP, TT for TaqI SNP, BB for BsmI SNP and AA for ApaI were used as the reference category. The heterogeneities in the comparisons (I²<50%, fixed-effects models; I²>50%, random-effects models) ascertained the application of Fixed-effects or random-effects models.

3.3. Meta-analysis for FokI (rs2228570) polymorphism and MS

Overall 16 case-control studies with 3057 cases and 2852 controls were analyzed for assessment of FokI gene polymorphism and MS risk. Of 16 studies, 9 studies carried out in Europe continent [21, 24, 34-40] 4 studies in Asia continent [18, 19, 41, 42] one study in America continent [43] and finally 2 studies in Australia [17, 44] (Table 1). No significant association was observed between FokI polymorphism and MS risk across all genetic models. Additionally, subgroup analysis based on geographical location was performed which the pooled results rejected any association between FokI polymorphism and risk of MS in European and Asian populations. Since there was only one study for American, and two studies for Australian populations, these studies were excluded from the subgroup analysis. The results of pooled ORs, heterogeneity tests and publication bias tests for different analysis models are shown in table 3 (Supplementary Figure 1 and 2).

3.4. Meta-analysis for TaqI (rs731236) polymorphism and MS

There were 23 case-control studies with 3758 cases and 3992 controls concerning TaqI polymorphism and MS risk. Among them, 13 studies were conducted in European countries [21, 22, 24, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 45-49], 5 studies in Asian countries [18, 41, 42, 50, 51], 2 studies in each Australian [17, 44] and American [43, 52] countries, and one study in Tunisia [20]. The TaqI polymorphism was demonstrated to be associated with MS risk under heterozygote contrast (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.01–1.59, random effect) (Figure 2), whilst no significant association was detected across other genotype models (Table 3). In addition, the pooled results of subgroup analysis decline presence of significant association under all defined genetic model (Supplementary Figure 3 and 4). Groups with less than three studies were removed from subgroup analysis. The results of pooled ORs, heterogeneity tests and publication bias tests for different analysis models are shown in Table 3.

3.5. Meta-analysis for BsmI (rs1544410) polymorphism and MS

After searching databases, finally 16 case-control studies with 1793 cases and 1815 controls subjects included to examine association between BsmI polymorphism and MS risk. Among 16 studies, six studies were performed in Europe [21, 22, 36, 40, 48, 49], eight studies in Asia [18, 41, 50, 51, 53-55], and only two studies in America continent [43, 52]. The pooled results demonstrate no significant association between BsmI polymorphism and MS risk under all genetic models, but subgroup analysis revealed that BsmI polymorphism across recessive model increased the risk of MS in Asian population (OR = 1.78 , 95%CI = 1.01–2.93, random effect) compared to European population (OR = 0.84, 95%CI = 0.66–1.06, random effect) (Figure 3). The results of pooled ORs, heterogeneity tests and publication bias tests for different analysis models are shown in table 3 (Supplementary Figure 5 and 6).

3.6. Meta-analysis for Apa1 (rs7975232) polymorphism and MS

For quantitative synthesis of association between ApaI polymorphism and MS risk, 20 case-control studies with 2306 cases and 2669 controls were identified to be eligible. Overall, nine studies in Europe [21, 36, 37, 39, 40, 45, 46, 48, 49], eight studies in Asia [18, 41, 42, 50, 51, 54-56], and one study in Africa [20], America [43] and Australia[17] were identified. There was no evidence of association between ApaI polymorphism and MS risk in the pooled results. However, subgroup analysis detected significant association between presence of ApaI SNP and risk of MS under recessive model (OR = 0.61, 95%CI = 0.42–0.89, random effect) and homozygote model (OR = 0.52, 95%CI = 0.32–0.86, random effect) in Asian population in comparison with European population (OR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.78–1.33, recessive model) and (OR = 1.11, 95%CI = 0.76–1.63, homozygote model) (Figure 3). The results of pooled ORs, heterogeneity tests, and publication bias tests for different analysis models are shown in Table 3 (Supplementary Figure 7 and 8).

3.7. Evaluation of heterogeneity

Significant heterogeneity existed for FokI, TaqI, BsmI, and ApaI polymorphism in all of the genetic models. Furthermore, in subgroup analysis, there was a significant heterogeneity for studies carried out in Asian and European countries (Table 3).

3.8. Publication bias

Publication bias was estimated using funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests. No evidence of publication bias was seen for all four SNP and subgroup analysis under all genetic models. Additionally, the shape of the funnel plot appeared to be symmetrical, indicating that there was no significant publication bias (Figure 4).

VDR gene, as a pleiotropic gene, has been shown to be associated with several diseases. In the previous studies, the relationship between VDR gene single nucleotide polymorphisms and autoimmune disorders was evaluated in several meta-analyses. The study of Feng et al.. [57] described that TaqI or BsmI polymorphism in VDR gene was significantly connected with autoimmune thyroid diseases. Mao et al.. [58] represented that the BsmI B allele may act as a risk factor for onset of systemic lupus erythematous (SLE) among Asians and overall populations and also the FokI FF genotype act as a potential risk factor for SLE predisposition in Asians. Furthermore, Tizaoui et al. [59] showed that the VDR gene TaqI and FokI polymorphisms may increase the risk of Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in European populations. And finally, Wang et al. [60] reported that the ApaI and BsmI polymorphisms were related with elevated susceptibility to type 1 diabetes (T1D) in Asian populations. Collectively, it could be assumed that VDR gene polymorphisms act as a potential risk factor in development or progression of autoimmune disorders.

Although four meta-analyses have been conducted in the past 10 years to evaluate the relationship between the VDR gene polymorphisms and MS, these findings were inconclusive due to the variations of the literature and selected databases. Hence, for resolving these inconsistencies, and to decrease the heterogeneity and the probability of random errors, we set out an updated meta-analysis. In this study, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for quantitative synthesis. No evidence of publication bias was observed for all four SNP in subgroup analysis and overall populations under five genetic models. Regarding the essential role of genetic factors in the pathogenesis of MS, we categorized our results according to ethnicity. Our meta-analysis revealed that BsmI, ApaI, and TaqI polymorphisms may play a significant role in the pathogenesis of MS in overall and Asian population. The results of this study indicated that TaqI polymorphism was associated with MS susceptibility under heterozygote contrast in overall population.

Subgroup analysis based on continent rejected any association between VDR gene polymorphisms and the MS risk in European population. However, a significant association between BsmI and ApaI polymorphisms and MS susceptibility was detected in Asian population. BsmI polymorphism was associated with 64% increased risk of MS under recessive model in Asian populations. On the other hand, ApaI polymorphism was associated with 37.5% and 34.5% decreased risk of MS under recessive model and aa vs. AA model in Asian populations, respectively. The possible reason of the conflicting results among Asian, European, and overall population could be related to environmental factors the individuals exposed to and different genetic backgrounds, which may have disproportionate effects on MS risk.

These findings are inconsistent with the results of the Huang et al. [23] and Garcia-Martin et al. [24] studies. In the study of Huang et al.., 11 case-control studies with 2599 cases and 2816 controls were included for assessing the association between VDR gene polymorphisms and the MS susceptibility, but no significant association was found. Another study by Garcia-Martin et al. that analyzed ten studies with 2944 MS patients and 3166 healthy subjects, reported that TaqI and FokI polymorphisms were not associated with the MS risk. In accordance with our study, the study of Zhang et al.. [25] and Tizaoui et al.. [26] showed a significant association between VDR gene polymorphisms and the MS susceptibility. However, there are some obvious differences in the findings of these studies in comparison with our study. Meta-analysis of Tizaoui et al.. reported an association of the FokI FF and ApaI AA genotypes with an elevated susceptibility of MS in a total of 3300 MS patients and 3194 healthy subjects from 13 case-control studies. In contrast, our analysis, consisting of 20 case-control studies, showed that ApaI polymorphism was associated with decreased risk of MS in Asian populations. In addition, the study of Zhang et al. reported that the A allele was related with the onset of disease in Asian populations. Nevertheless, the sensitivity analysis, by removing the studies not in HWE, rejected any association between the A allele and risk of MS, which was dissimilar to the results of the non-sensitivity analysis. Moreover, they failed to find any association between TaqI, BsmI, and ApaI polymorphisms and MS susceptibility in overall populations, Asians, and Caucasians. The main reasons that VDR gene polymorphism plays a diverse function across different studies or in different ethnic populations may be due to the following hints. Firstly, in many cases, controls in included studies deviated from HWE. Secondly, the differences in the ethnic contextual characteristics of the patients may be an important factor for these variations. Thirdly, VDR SNPs were suggested to be related with the basal levels of 1,25(OH)2D3 and vitamin D structure and function [61], which in turn could influence MS predisposition. Finally, MS is regarded to be a polygenic disorder, and therefore it is expected that various gene loci are interacted in the pathogenesis of MS.

Several epidemiological studies have strongly proposed that vitamin D insufficiency and sunshine contributes to MS risk in temperate countries. Vitamin D sufficiency and insufficiency could be a protective and risk factor, respectively, among many other factors, and may be constantly regulating the global MS susceptibility from the mother's pregnancy to adulthood. The main role of vitamin D in MS seems to be immunomodulatory, affecting the different groups of T and B cells in the general immune system, however, neurotrophic and neuroprotectant mechanisms could also be applied at the central nervous system (CNS) [62, 63]. Interestingly, in clinical setting, correction of hypovitaminosis D through recommending oral D3 supplements resulted in raises in 25(OH)D levels in serum, which were correlated with reductions in annualized relapse-rate (ARR) in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) [64]. The disease activity is generally improved with higher 25(OH)D level. Rotstein et al.. reported that in MS patients under fingolimod (FTY) therapy, higher 25(OH)D level was related to longer survival for the combined endpoint and for relapses [65]. A recent randomized clinical trial reveled a potential therapeutic effect of cholecalciferol in RRMS patients with low serum 25OHD level, which already treated with interferon beta-1a [66]. Furthermore, comprehensive systematic review by Dörr et al.. based on many line of data, including preclinical investigations, association studies, epidemiologic data, and animal studies on vitamin D status and disease activity, implies that higher serum level of vitamin D are beneficial in terms of the susceptibility to MS as well as the further course of the disease in patients with established MS [67]. In the earliest phase of disease, lower levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D correlates with higher disease activity, however, lower 25(OH)D3 levels hardly affects patients in terms of clinical presentations, implying that low 25(OH)D3 concentrations are rather a susceptibility factor for than an outcome of MS; Since the bioavailable vitamin D concentration did not differ between the MS patients and healthy subjects, the main mechanism underlying the association of vitamin D and MS does not seem to be linked with decreased vitamin D bioavailability [68]. Despite all that has been discussed, a meta-analysis by Zheng and colleagues reported that vitamin D had no therapeutic effect on ARR and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score in the patients with MS [69].

Permutations and combinations of common variants account as a predisposition factors in the etiology of several complex diseases. Variations of DNA sequence like SNPs exert modest biological impacts [11]. Three polymorphisms of VDR gene, including TaqI, ApaI, and BsmI do not influence the structure of VDR protein. Their affect may be associated with alterations in translation efficiency and/or stability of the RNA. On the other hand, the FokI polymorphism has been related to changes in both transcriptional activity and VDR protein structure [70]. The wild-type short transcript of FokI is related with the elevated transcriptional activity [70]. One potential exception is differential effect of the FokI polymorphism on the immune system [16]. Our data suggested that the ApaI polymorphism has a significant functional effect on MS. Furthermore, the TaqI polymorphism was associated with MS risk. However, some other factors that were not examined in the current meta-analysis might affect the TaqI expression. At this point, the expression and function of VDR in transactivating target genes are indicated by environment, genetics, and ethnicity due to its complex interactions [71]. Thus far, three essential environmental risk factors for MS have been determined: vitamin D insufficiency, cigarette smoking, and Epstein–Barr virus infection [72, 73]. Moreover, sun exposure interacts with VDR gene functional variants in childhood to affect MS predisposition.

Some limitations of this meta-analysis should be considered. First, inaccessibility to the original data of the included studies restricted our further assessment of potential interactions, since the interactions between and even various polymorphic region of the same gene may affect the risk. Moreover, this study was solely focused on the articles published in the English language. We detected significant heterogeneity in all of the genetic models, which could be derived by various factors, such as variations in ethnicities. In the current study, ethnicities were Caucasians from Asians, Caucasians from Europe and Australia. Also, heterogeneity may be created by publication year of included studies, which extended between 1999 and 2018. There are several other possible reasons which may be regarded as a source of heterogeneity. Firstly, the criteria of MS diagnosis are inconsistent between studies. While some of them employed Poser's criteria, other studies used McDonald's criteria for MS diagnosis. Secondly, gender may act as a potential source for heterogeneity. Although both male and female subjects were enrolled in most studies, two studies were not sex-matched and one study only included women subjects [35, 43, 45]. Thirdly, genotyping methods were not consistent. While half of the included studies used PCR-RFLP, approximately the other half employed TaqMan assay and one study used PCR-SPP. Fourthly, geographical and ethnic factors may also participate in heterogeneity, because studies with the same ethnic source were accompanied in various geographical regions.

The results from the studies examined in this met-analysis should be interpreted with cautious for some reasons. Our findings suggest that, to afford accurate estimates of the relation between VDR polymorphisms and MS risk, several factors should be regarded. Although there are many functional VDR polymorphisms in the promoter region of the VDR gene, only four SNPs in the VDR gene have been evaluated. The interaction of the MHC genes with VDR gene have been demonstrated to be important in MS [74, 75]. Remarkably, various environmental factors may interact with VDR polymorphisms to alter MS susceptibility. The current meta-analysis could not assess all interactions between VDR polymorphisms and study characteristics because of insufficient data from the original publications.

Taken all together, the current meta-analysis affords a comprehensive investigation of the available information for the association between the VDR polymorphisms and MS susceptibility. This meta-analysis of 30 case-control studies reveled a significant association between TaqI polymorphism and MS susceptibility. In subgroup analysis, BsmI polymorphism was associated with increased risk of MS in Asian populations. In addition, ApaI polymorphism was associated with decreased risk of MS in Asian populations. However, neither in overall population nor in subgroup analysis significant association between Fok1 (rs2228570) polymorphism and MS susceptibility was found. Future large-scale studies on gene–environment and gene–gene interactions are required to estimate related risk factors and assist early diagnosis of patients at high risk for MS.

VDR: Vitamin D receptor polymorphism

MS: Multiple sclerosis

MHC-II: major histocompatibility complex II

CNS: central nervous system

RFLP: restriction fragment length polymorphisms

LD: linkage disequilibrium

UTR: untranslated region

PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses

SNP: Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms

OR: Odd Ratio

CI: Confidence Interval

SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus

T1D: type 1 diabetes

PCR-SPP: Polymerase chain reaction - Sequence Specific

HLA: human leukocyte antigen

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by ethic committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sector.

Authors' contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: DI and BR. Extracted data: DI and MA. Performed the data analysis: BR. Writing original draft: RR and BR. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr.Saeid Aslani for his valuable comments that greatly improved the manuscript.

Authors' information (optional)

Ramazan Rezaei is an associate researcher of the department of Immunology at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. His research focuses on autoimmune diseases, Immunogenetics, and Immunotherapy, with a particular interest in the Manipulation of Tumor deriver exosomes as a therapeutic vaccine in colorectal cancer.

Imani, D., et al., Association of nod‐like receptor protein‐3 single nucleotide gene polymorphisms and expression with the susceptibility to relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. International journal of immunogenetics, 2018. 45(6): p. 329-336.
Emamnejad, R., et al., Circulating mesenchymal stem cells, stromal derived factor (SDF)-1 and IP-10 levels increased in clinically active multiple sclerosis patients but not in clinically stable patients treated with beta interferon. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders, 2019. 35: p. 233-238.
Longo, D.L., Daniel S. Reich, MD, Ph. D., Claudia F. Lucchinetti, MD, and Peter A. Calabresi, MD. N Engl J Med, 2018. 378: p. 169-80.
Krieger, S.C., et al., The topographical model of multiple sclerosis: A dynamic visualization of disease course. Neurology-Neuroimmunology Neuroinflammation, 2016. 3(5): p. e279.
McFarland, H.F. and R. Martin, Multiple sclerosis: a complicated picture of autoimmunity. Nature immunology, 2007. 8(9): p. 913.
Adorini, L. and G. Penna, Control of autoimmune diseases by the vitamin D endocrine system. Nature Reviews Rheumatology, 2008. 4(8): p. 404.
DeLuca, H.F., Overview of general physiologic features and functions of vitamin D. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2004. 80(6): p. 1689S-1696S.
Gorman, S., et al., Topically applied 1, 25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 enhances the suppressive activity of CD4+ CD25+ cells in the draining lymph nodes. The Journal of Immunology, 2007. 179(9): p. 6273-6283.
Smolders, J., et al., Association of vitamin D metabolite levels with relapse rate and disability in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 2008. 14(9): p. 1220-1224.
Runia, T.F., et al., Lower serum vitamin D levels are associated with a higher relapse risk in multiple sclerosis. Neurology, 2012. 79(3): p. 261-266.
Uitterlinden, A.G., et al., Genetics and biology of vitamin D receptor polymorphisms. Gene, 2004. 338(2): p. 143-156.
Zmuda, J.M., J.A. Cauley, and R.E. Ferrell, Molecular epidemiology of vitamin D receptor gene variants. Epidemiologic reviews, 2000. 22(2): p. 203-217.
Makoui, M.H., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and susceptibility to asthma: meta-analysis based on 17 case-control studies. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, 2019.
Ručević, I., et al., Vitamin D endocrine system and psoriasis vulgaris-review of the literature. Acta Dermatovenerologica Croatica, 2009. 17(3): p. 0-0.
Saccone, D., F. Asani, and L. Bornman, Regulation of the vitamin D receptor gene by environment, genetics and epigenetics. Gene, 2015. 561(2): p. 171-180.
van Etten, E., et al., The vitamin D receptor gene FokI polymorphism: functional impact on the immune system. European journal of immunology, 2007. 37(2): p. 395-405.
Tajouri, L., et al., Variation in the vitamin D receptor gene is associated with multiple sclerosis in an Australian population. Journal of neurogenetics, 2005. 19(1): p. 25-38.
Al-Temaimi, R.A., et al., The association of vitamin D receptor polymorphisms with multiple sclerosis in a case-control study from Kuwait. PloS one, 2015. 10(11): p. e0142265.
Narooie-Nejad, M., et al., Positive association of vitamin D receptor gene variations with multiple sclerosis in South East Iranian population. BioMed research international, 2015. 2015. 44(3): p. 174-185.
Ben‐Selma, W., et al., Age‐and gender‐specific effects on VDR gene polymorphisms and risk of the development of multiple sclerosis in Tunisians: a preliminary study. International journal of immunogenetics, 2015. 42(3): p. 174-181.
Čierny, D., et al., FokI vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism in association with multiple sclerosis risk and disability progression in Slovaks. Neurological research, 2015. 37(4): p. 301-308.
Sioka, C., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms in multiple sclerosis patients in northwest Greece. Journal of negative results in biomedicine, 2011. 10(1): p. 3.
Huang, J. and Z.-F. Xie, Polymorphisms in the vitamin D receptor gene and multiple sclerosis risk: a meta-analysis of case–control studies. Journal of the neurological sciences, 2012. 313(1-2): p. 79-85.
García-Martín, E., et al., Vitamin D3 receptor (VDR) gene rs2228570 (Fok1) and rs731236 (Taq1) variants are not associated with the risk for multiple sclerosis: results of a new study and a meta-analysis. PloS one, 2013. 8(6): p. e65487.
Zhang, Y.-J., et al., Association between VDR polymorphisms and multiple sclerosis: systematic review and updated meta-analysis of case-control studies. Neurological Sciences, 2018. 39(2): p. 225-234.
Tizaoui, K., et al., Association between vitamin D receptor polymorphisms and multiple sclerosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of case–control studies. Cellular & molecular immunology, 2015. 12(2): p. 243.
Moher, D., et al., Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine, 2009. 151(4): p. 264-269.
Stang, A., Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. European journal of epidemiology, 2010. 25(9): p. 603-605.
Huedo-Medina, T.B., et al., Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I² index? Psychological methods, 2006. 11(2): p. 193.
Mantel, N. and W. Haenszel, Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the national cancer institute, 1959. 22(4): p. 719-748.
DerSimonian, R. and N. Laird, Meta-analysis in clinical trials Control Clin Trials 7: 177–188. Find this article online, 1986.
Egger, M., et al., Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj, 1997. 315(7109): p. 629-634.
Begg, C.B. and M. Mazumdar, Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics, 1994: p. 1088-1101.
Partridge, J., et al., Susceptibility and outcome in MS: associations with polymorphisms in pigmentation-related genes. Neurology, 2004. 62(12): p. 2323-2325.
Smolders, J., et al., Fok-I vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism (rs10735810) and vitamin D metabolism in multiple sclerosis. Journal of neuroimmunology, 2009. 207(1-2): p. 117-121.
Agnello, L., et al., Vitamin D receptor polymorphisms and 25-hydroxyvitamin D in a group of Sicilian multiple sclerosis patients. Neurological Sciences, 2016. 37(2): p. 261-267.
Yucel, F.E., et al., Analysis of vitamin D receptor polymorphisms in patients with familial multiple sclerosis. Medical Archives, 2018. 72(1): p. 58.
Bettencourt, A., et al., The vitamin D receptor gene FokI polymorphism and Multiple Sclerosis in a Northern Portuguese population. Journal of neuroimmunology, 2017. 309: p. 34-37.
Kamisli, O., et al., The association between vitamin D receptor polymorphisms and multiple sclerosis in a Turkish population. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders, 2018. 20: p. 78-81.
Křenek, P., et al., The Impact of Five VDR Polymorphisms on Multiple Sclerosis Risk and Progression: a Case-Control and Genotype-Phenotype Study. Journal of Molecular Neuroscience, 2018: p. 1-8.
Abdollahzadeh, R., et al., Predisposing role of vitamin D receptor (VDR) polymorphisms in the development of multiple sclerosis: A case-control study. Journal of the neurological sciences, 2016. 367: p. 148-151.
SADEGHI, A., et al., The BsmI, FokI, ApaI and TaqI Polymorphisms in Vitamin D Receptor Gene in Iranian Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Case-Control Study. 2015;3:28-32.
Simon, K.C., et al., Polymorphisms in vitamin D metabolism related genes and risk of multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 2010. 16(2): p. 133-138.
Dickinson, J.L., et al., Past environmental sun exposure and risk of multiple sclerosis: a role for the Cdx-2 Vitamin D receptor variant in this interaction. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 2009. 15(5): p. 563-570.
Smolders, J., et al., Association study on two vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms and vitamin D metabolites in multiple sclerosis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2009. 1173(1): p. 515-520.
Irizar, H., et al., HLA-DRB1* 15: 01 and multiple sclerosis: a female association? Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 2012. 18(5): p. 569-577.
Agliardi, C., et al., Vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene SNPs influence VDR expression and modulate protection from multiple sclerosis in HLA-DRB1* 15-positive individuals. Brain, behavior, and immunity, 2011. 25(7): p. 1460-1467.
Cakina, S., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms in multiple sclerosis disease: A case-control study. Revista Romana de Medicina de Laborator, 2018. 26(4): p. 489-495.
Terzi, M., et al. Vitamin D Receptor Gene Polymorphism in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. in MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL. 2018. SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD 1 OLIVERS YARD, 55 CITY ROAD, LONDON EC1Y 1SP, ENGLAND.2018. 24(7) pp. 61-62.
Narooie-Nejad, M., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and the risk of multiple sclerosis in South Eastern of Iran. Journal of molecular neuroscience, 2015. 56(3): p. 572-576.
Yamout, B., et al., Vitamin D receptor biochemical and genetic profiling and HLA-class II genotyping among Lebanese with multiple sclerosis—a pilot study. Journal of neuroimmunology, 2016. 293: p. 59-64.
Bermúdez-Morales, V.H., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms are associated with multiple sclerosis in Mexican adults. Journal of neuroimmunology, 2017. 306: p. 20-24.
Fukazawa, T., et al., Association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism with multiple sclerosis in Japanese. Journal of the neurological sciences, 1999. 166(1): p. 47-52.
Bing W, H.L., Tao W et al Association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism with multiple sclerosis. . Henan Med Res 49(24):86–87, 2009.
Qinlin S, R.X., Yinhua W, et al. , Association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism with multiple sclerosis. Chin J Tissue Eng Res,, 2004.
Niino, M., et al., Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism in multiple sclerosis and the association with HLA class II alleles. Journal of the neurological sciences, 2000. 177(1): p. 65-71.
Feng, M., et al., Polymorphisms in the vitamin D receptor gene and risk of autoimmune thyroid diseases: a meta-analysis. 2013, Springer.
Mao, S. and S. Huang, Association between vitamin D receptor gene BsmI, FokI, ApaI and TaqI polymorphisms and the risk of systemic lupus erythematosus: a meta-analysis. Rheumatology international, 2014. 34(3): p. 381-388.
Tizaoui, K. and K. Hamzaoui, Association between VDR polymorphisms and rheumatoid arthritis disease: systematic review and updated meta-analysis of case–control studies. Immunobiology, 2015. 220(6): p. 807-816.
Wang, G., X. Kuanfeng, and T. Yang, Associations between polymorphisms of vitamin D receptor gene and type 1 diabetes susceptibility: a meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Diabetes, 2015(2): p. 110-114.
Morán-Auth, Y., M. Penna-Martinez, and K. Badenhoop, VDR FokI polymorphism is associated with a reduced T-helper cell population under vitamin D stimulation in type 1 diabetes patients. The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology, 2015. 148: p. 184-186.
Pierrot-Deseilligny, C. and J.-C. Souberbielle, Vitamin D and multiple sclerosis: an update. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders, 2017. 14: p. 35-45.
Koduah, P., F. Paul, and J.-M. Dörr, Vitamin D in the prevention, prediction and treatment of neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory diseases. Epma Journal, 2017. 8(4): p. 313-325.
Laursen, J.H., et al., Vitamin D supplementation reduces relapse rate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients treated with natalizumab. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders, 2016. 10: p. 169-173.
Rotstein, D.L., et al., Effect of vitamin D on MS activity by disease-modifying therapy class. Neurology-Neuroimmunology Neuroinflammation, 2015. 2(6): p. e167.
Camu, W., et al., Cholecalciferol in relapsing-remitting MS: A randomized clinical trial (CHOLINE). Neurology-Neuroimmunology Neuroinflammation, 2019. 6(5): p. e597.
Dörr, J., A. Döring, and F. Paul, Can we prevent or treat multiple sclerosis by individualised vitamin D supply? Epma Journal, 2013. 4(1): p. 4.
Behrens, J.R., et al., Low 25‐hydroxyvitamin D, but not the bioavailable fraction of 25‐hydroxyvitamin D, is a risk factor for multiple sclerosis. European journal of neurology, 2016. 23(1): p. 62-67.
Zheng, C., et al., The efficacy of vitamin D in multiple sclerosis: A meta-analysis. Multiple sclerosis and related disorders, 2018. 23: p. 56-61.
Jurutka, P.W., et al., The polymorphic N terminus in human vitamin D receptor isoforms influences transcriptional activity by modulating interaction with transcription factor IIB. Molecular endocrinology, 2000. 14(3): p. 401-420.
O’Gorman, C., R. Lucas, and B. Taylor, Environmental risk factors for multiple sclerosis: a review with a focus on molecular mechanisms. International journal of molecular sciences, 2012. 13(9): p. 11718-11752.
Pierrot-Deseilligny, C. and J.-C. Souberbielle, Contribution of vitamin D insufficiency to the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 2013. 6(2): p. 81-116.
Canbay, C., The essential environmental cause of multiple sclerosis disease. Progress In Electromagnetics Research, 2010. 101: p. 375-391.
Handunnetthi, L., S.V. Ramagopalan, and G.C. Ebers, Multiple sclerosis, vitamin D, and HLA-DRB1* 15. Neurology, 2010. 74(23): p. 1905-1910.
Ramagopalan, S.V., et al., Expression of the multiple sclerosis-associated MHC class II Allele HLA-DRB1* 1501 is regulated by vitamin D. PLoS genetics, 2009. 5(2): p. e1000369.

Table 1: Characteristics of studies included in Meta-analysis of overall MS.

Study author	Year	Country	Ethnicity	Sex cases/controls	Total cases/control	Age case/control (Mean)	Genotyping method	Quality score
FokI (rs2228570)
Partridge et al.	2004	UK	European	M=NR F=NR	406 /234	43.8± 11.2 / 50.1	NR	7
Tajouri et al.	2005	Australia	Australian	M=NR F=NR	98 / 93	NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Smolders et al.	2009	Netherland	European	M=62/ 142 F=150/ 147	212 / 289	46.7± 11.9 /34.9 ± 14.3	PCR–RFLP	8
Dickinson et al.	2009	Australia	Australian	M=NR F=NR	136 / 235	43.5 ±9.3/ 43.6± 9.2	Taq-Man	7
Simon et al.	2010	USA	American	M=NR F=NR	100 / 100	NR	Taq-Man	7
Garcia-Martin et al.	2013	Spain	European	M=94/ 98 F=209/ 212	303 / 310	43.9± 11.4/ 43.4± 11.7	Taq-Man	8
Al-Temaimi et al.	2015	Kuwait	Asian	M=17/ 19 F=33/ 31	50 / 50	33.4± 9.6/ 28.6± 7.9	Taq-Man	7
Narooie-Nejad et al.	2015	Iran	Asian	M=25 / 28 F=88/ 94	113 / 122	32.4 ±8.9/ 30.8± 10.2	PCR–RFLP	7
Cierny et al.	2015	Slovakia	European	M=66 / 74 F=204 / 229	270 / 303	41.3 ±10.8/ 38.7± 13.6	PCR–RFLP	8
Luisa Agnello et al.	2016	Italy	European	M=24 / 30 F=80 / 42	104 / 75	39.6 ± 10.3/ 45.2± 9.36	PCR–RFLP	6
Abdollahzadeh et al.	2016	Iran	Asian	M=40 / 38 F=120 / 112	160 / 150	35.9 ±3 / 36.8± 1.8	PCR–RFLP	7
Yucel et al.	2017	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	29 / 114	33.7 ±10.7 / 33.1± 8.5	Taq-Man	6
Bettencourt et al.	2017	Portugal	European	M=185/198 F=348/248	533 / 446	30.2± 9.3/ NR	Taq-Man	8
Kamisli et al.	2018	Turkey	European	M=46 / 58 F=121 / 88	167 / 146	39.96 ±9.4 / 33.81± 7.1	Taq-Man	7
Sadeghi et al.	2018	Iran	Asian	M=17/11 F=63/39	80 / 50	18-60/ 18-60	PCR–RFLP	6
Křenek et al.	2018	Czech Republic	European	M=80/49 F=216/86	296/135	34-37 / NR	PCR–RFLP	7
TaqI (rs731236)
Partridge et al.	2004	UK	European	M=NR F=NR	402 /231	43.8± 11.2 / 50.1	NR	7
Tajouri et al.	2005	Australia	Australian	M=NR F=NR	104 / 186	NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Smolders et al.	2009	Netherland	European	M=62/ 142 F=150/ 147	212 / 289	46.7± 11.9 /34.9 ± 14.3	PCR–RFLP	8
Dickinson et al.	2009	Australia	Australian	M=NR F=NR	136 / 235	43.5 ±9.3/ 43.6± 9.2	Taq-Man	7
Simon et al.	2010	USA	American	M=NR F=NR	100 / 100	NR	Taq-Man	7
Sioka et al.	2011	Greece	European	M=23/ 23 F=46/ 58	69 / 81	39 ± 10.5/38.7± 10.7	Taq-Man	7
Agliardi et al.	2011	Italy	European	M=NR F=NR	641 / 558	27.8± 9.2/ 29.4± 6.5	Taq-Man	8
Irizar et al.	2012	Spain	European	M=NR F=NR	136 / 337	44.14± 13.02/ 50.17± 13.26	PCR-SSP	7
Garcia-Martin et al.	2013	Spain	European	M=94/ 98 F=209/ 212	303 / 310	43.9± 11.4/ 43.4± 11.7	Taq-Man	8
Selma et al.	2015	Tunisia	African	M=22/ 47 F=38/ 67	60 / 114	35.8±6.3 / 37 ±9.3	PCR–RFLP	6
Narooie-Nejad et al.	2015	Iran	Asian	M=25 / 28 F=88/ 94	113 / 122	32.4 ±8.9/ 30.8± 10.2	PCR–RFLP	7
Al-Temaimi et al.	2015	Kuwait	Asian	M=17/ 19 F=33/ 31	50 / 50	33.4± 9.6/ 28.6± 7.9	Taq-Man	7
Yamout et al.	2016	Lebanon	Asian	M=NR F=NR	50 / 99	32.3 ±12.7 / 35.2± 13	PCR–RFLP	6
Cierny et al.	2016	Slovakia	European	M=66 / 74 F=204 / 229	270 / 303	41.3 ±10.8/ 38.7± 13.6	PCR–RFLP	8
Luisa Agnello et al.	2016	Italy	European	M=24 / 30 F=80 / 42	104 / 75	39.6 ± 10.3/ 45.2± 9.36	PCR–RFLP	6
Terzi et al.	2016	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	87 / 99	30.14 9.66/ NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Abdollahzadeh et al.	2016	Iran	Asian	M=40 / 38 F=120 / 112	160 / 150	35.9 ±3 / 36.8± 1.8	PCR–RFLP	7
Yucel et al.	2017	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	28 / 72	33.7 ±10.7 / 33.1± 8.5	Taq-Man	6
Kamisli et al.	2018	Turkey	European	M=46 / 58 F=121 / 88	167 / 146	39.96 ±9.4 / 33.81± 7.1	Taq-Man	7
Morales et al.	2018	Mexico	American	M=39/ 57 F=81/123	120 / 180	33.89 ±10.03/ 32.79± 10.17	Taq-Man	6
Sadeghi et al.	2018	Iran	Asian	M=17/11 F=63/39	80 / 50	18-60/ 18-60	PCR–RFLP	6
Cakina et al..	2018	Turkey	European	M=19/22 F=51/48	70 / 70	44.4±11.2 / 38.2±9.5	PCR–RFLP	7
Křenek et al.	2018	Czech Republic	European	M=80/49 F=216/86	296 / 135	34-37 / NR	PCR–RFLP	7
BsmI (rs1544410)
Fukazawa et al.	1999	Japan	Asian	M=21/33 F=56/62	77 / 95	34.9 ± 12.9/NR	PCR–RFLP	8
Qinli Sun et al.	2004	China	Asian	M=NR F=NR	63 / 95	NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Bing Wu et al.	2009	China	Asian	M=NR F=NR	83 / 120	NR	PCR–RFLP	7
Simon et al.	2010	USA	American	M=NR F=NR	101 / 100	NR	Taq-Man	7
Sioka et al.	2011	Greece	European	M=23/ 23 F=46/ 58	69 / 81	39 ± 10.5/38.7± 10.7	Taq-Man	7
Al-Temaimi et al.	2015	Kuwait	Asian	M=17/ 19 F=33/ 31	50 / 50	33.4± 9.6/ 28.6± 7.9	Taq-Man	7
Narooie-Nejad et al.	2015	Iran	Asian	M=25 / 28 F=88/ 94	113 / 122	32.4 ±8.9/ 30.8± 10.2	PCR–RFLP	7
Abdollahzadeh et al.	2016	Iran	Asian	M=40 / 38 F=120 / 112	160 / 150	35.9 ±3 / 36.8± 1.8	PCR–RFLP	7
Yamout et al.	2016	Lebanon	Asian	M=NR F=NR	50 / 99	32.3 ±12.7 / 35.2± 13	PCR–RFLP	6
Cierny et al.	2016	Slovakia	European	M=66 / 74 F=204 / 229	270 / 303	41.3 ±10.8/ 38.7± 13.6	PCR–RFLP	8
Luisa Agnello et al.	2016	Italy	European	M=24 / 30 F=80 / 42	104 / 75	39.6 ± 10.3/ 45.2± 9.36	PCR–RFLP	6
Terzi et al.	2016	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	87 / 100	30.14 ±9.66/ NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Morales et al.	2017	Mexico	American	M=39/ 57 F=81/123	120 / 180	33.89 ±10.03/ 32.79± 10.17	Taq-Man	6
Sadeghi et al.	2018	Iran	Asian	M=17/11 F=63/39	80 / 50	18-60/ 18-60	PCR–RFLP	6
Cakina et al..	2018	Turkey	European	M=19/22 F=51/48	70 / 70	44.4±11.2 / 38.2±9.5	PCR–RFLP	7
Křenek et al.	2018	Czech Republic	European	M=80/49 F=216/86	296 / 135	34-37 / NR	PCR–RFLP	7
ApaI (rs7975232)
Niino et al.	2000	Japan	Asian	M=21 / 33 F=56 / 62	77 / 95	36.2±11.2 / 34.4 ± 10.2	PCR–RFLP	7
Qinli Sun et al.	2004	China	Asian	M=NR F=NR	63 / 95	NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Tajouri et al.	2005	Australia	Australian	M=NR F=NR	104 / 100	NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Smolders et al.	2009	Netherland	European	M=62/ 142 F=150/ 147	212 / 289	46.7± 11.9 /34.9 ± 14.3	PCR–RFLP	8
Bing Wu et al.	2009	China	Asian	M=NR F=NR	83 / 120	NR	PCR–RFLP	7
Simon et al.	2010	USA	American	M=NR F=NR	100 / 100	NR	Taq-Man	7
Irizar et al.	2012	Spain	European	M=NR F=NR	134 / 340	44.14± 13.02/ 50.17± 13.26	PCR-SSP	7
Narooie-Nejad et al.	2015	Iran	Asian	M=25 / 28 F=88/ 94	113 / 122	32.4 ±8.9/ 30.8± 10.2	PCR–RFLP	7
Al-Temaimi et al.	2015	Kuwait	Asian	M=17/ 19 F=33/ 31	50 / 50	33.4± 9.6/ 28.6± 7.9	Taq-Man	7
Selma et al.	2015	Tunisia	African	M=22/ 47 F=38/ 67	60 / 114	35.8±6.3 / 37 ±9.3	PCR–RFLP	6
Yamout et al.	2016	Lebanon	Asian	M=NR F=NR	50 / 134	32.3 ±12.7 / 35.2± 13	PCR–RFLP	6
Luisa Agnello et al.	2016	Italy	European	M=24 / 30 F=80 / 42	104 / 75	39.6 ± 10.3/ 45.2± 9.36	PCR–RFLP	6
Abdollahzadeh et al.	2016	Iran	Asian	M=40 / 38 F=120 / 112	160 / 150	35.9 ±3 / 36.8± 1.8	PCR–RFLP	7
Cierny et al.	2016	Slovakia	European	M=66 / 74 F=204 / 229	270 / 303	41.3 ±10.8/ 38.7± 13.6	PCR–RFLP	8
Terzi et al.	2016	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	87 / 100	30.14 9.66/ NR	PCR–RFLP	6
Yucel et al.	2017	Turkey	European	M=NR F=NR	26 / 81	33.7 ±10.7 / 33.1± 8.5	Taq-Man	6
Kamisli et al.	2018	Turkey	European	M=46 / 58 F=121 / 88	167 / 146	39.96 ±9.4 / 33.81± 7.1	Taq-Man	8
Sadeghi et al.	2018	Iran	Asian	M=17/11 F=63/39	80 / 50	18-60/ 18-60	PCR–RFLP	7
Cakina et al..	2018	Turkey	European	M=19/22 F=51/48	70 / 70	44.4±11.2 / 38.2±9.5	PCR–RFLP	7
Křenek et al.	2018	Czech Republic	European	M=80/49 F=216/86	296 / 135	34-37 / NR	PCR–RFLP	7

NR, not reported; M, male; F, female; MS, Multiple Sclerosis.

Table 2. Distribution of genotype and allele among MS patients and controls.

Study author	MS cases							Healthy control														P-HWE		MAF
	FF	Ff	ff		F		f	FF		Ff				Ff			F		f
FokI (rs2228570)
Partridge et al.	155	196	55		506		306	83			105			46			271		197			0/22		0/42
Tajouri et al.	47	40	11		134		62	34			48			11			116		70			0/33		0/376
Smolders et al.	79	103	30		261		163	113			134			42			360		218			0/82		0/377
Dickinson et al.	58	61	17		177		95	86			110			39			282		188			0/72		0/4
Simon et al.	36	45	19		117		83	41			44			15			126		74			0/57		0/37
Garcia-Martin et al.	130	141	32		401		205	144			124			42			412		208			0/07		0/335
Al-Temaimi et al.	33	14	3		80		20	33			16			1			82		18			0/55		0/18
Narooie-Nejad et al.	73	32	8		178		48	93			29			0			215		29			0/13		0/118
Cierny et al.	96	143	31		335		205	118			143			42			379		227			0/89		0/374
Luisa Agnello et al.	34	52	18		120		88	29			36			10			94		56			0/82		0/373
Abdollahzadeh et al.	14	67	79		95		225	11			59			80			81		219			0/97		0/73
Yucel et al.	22	6	1		50		8	72			34			8			178		50			0/16		0/219
Bettencourt et al.	223	227	83		673		393	204		197				45			605		287			0/79		0/321
Kamisli et al.	75	77	15		227		107	94		46				6			234		58			0/92		0/198
Sadeghi et al.	47	32	1		126		34	20		26				4			66		34			0/26		0/34
Křenek et al.	102	145	49		349		243	37		74				24			148		122			0/21		0/451
Study author	MS cases							Healthy control													P-HWE		MAF
	TT	Tt	tt		T		t	TT	Tt				tt			T		T
TaqI (rs731236)
Partridge et al.	140	203	59		483		321	86		106				39			278		184			0/51		0/398
Tajouri et al.	27	57	20		111		97	104		42				40			250		122			0/57		0/327
Smolders et al.	83	96	33		262		162	112		138				39			362		216			0/53		0/373
Dickinson et al.	52	68	16		172		100	86		108				41			280		190			0/48		0/4
Simon et al.	40	50	10		130		70	36		48				16			120		80			1		0/4
Sioka et al.	30	30	9		90		48	33		36				12			102		60			0/67		0/37
Agliardi et al.	219	308	114		746		536	220		249				89			689		427			0/19		0/375
Irizar et al.	55	70	11		180		92	145		157				35			447		227			0/43		0/336
Garcia-Martin et al.	129	129	45		387		219	131		144				35			406		214			0/62		0/345
Selma et al.	28	29	3		85		35	75		38				1			188		40			0/1		0/175
Narooie-Nejad et al.	9	44	60		62		164	94		26				2			214		30			0/89		0/122
Al-Temaimi et al.	31	19	0		81		19	15		28				7			58		42			0/29		0/42
Yamout et al.	19	23	8		61		39	32		48				19			112		86			0/89		0/434
Cierny et al.	94	138	38		326		214	125		123				55			373		233			0/01		0/384
Luisa Agnello et al.	35	48	21		118		90	23		40				12			86		64			0/43		0/426
Terzi et al.	30	43	14		103		71	48		43				9			137		61			0/85		0/308
Abdollahzadeh et al.	38	80	42		156		164	63		68				19			194		106			0/92		0/353
Yucel et al.	13	15	0		41		15	31		26				15			88		56			0/05		0/388
Kamisli et al.	71	77	19		219		115	59		65				22			183		109			0/55		0/373
Morales et al.	65	46	9		176		64	122		41				17			285		75			0/005		0/208
Sadeghi et al.	38	41	1		117		43	14		34				2			62		38			0/02		0/38
Cakina et al.	20	41	9		81		59	20		45				5			85		55			0/001		0/392
Křenek et al.	118	151	27		387		205	58		66				11			182		88			0/19		0/325
Study author	MS cases							Healthy control														P-HWE		MAF
	BB	Bb	bb		B		b	BB		Bb				bb			B		B
BsmI (rs1544410)
Fukazawa et al.	0	11	66		11		143	3		24				68			30		160			0/62		0/842
Qinli Sun et al.	0	7	56		7		119	0		11				84			11		179			0/54		0/942
Bing Wu et al.	0	5	78		5		161	0		26				94			26		214			0/18		0/891
Simon et al.	39	49	13		127		75	34		47				19			115		85			0/71		0/425
Sioka et al.	28	41	0		97		41	26		55				0			107		55			0/004		0/339
Al-Temaimi et al.	20	30	0		70		30	15		25				10			55		45			0/94		0/45
Narooie-Nejad et al.	59	50	4		168		58	45		65				12			155		89			0/09		0/364
Abdollahzadeh et al.	46	79	35		171		149	70		65				15			205		95			0/98		0/316
Yamout et al.	10	21	19		41		59	16		53				30			85		113			0/35		0/57
Cierny et al.	43	139	88		225		315	73		111				119			257		349			0/001		0/575
Luisa Agnello et al.	23	48	33		94		114	17		37				21			71		79			0/92		0/526
Terzi et al.	19	40	28		78		96	14		47				39			75		125			0/97		0/625
Morales et al.	60	38	22		158		82	110		60				10			280		80			0/63		0/222
Sadeghi et al.	12	51	17		75		85	16		29				5			61		39			0/12		0/39
Cakina et al..	14	36	20		64		76	11		37				22			59		81			0/48		0/578
Křenek et al.	114	153	29		381		211	61		63				11			185		85			0/34		0/314
Study author	MS cases							Healthy control														P-HWE		MAF
	AA	Aa	aa	A		a		AA		Aa		aa			A					A
ApaI (rs7975232)
Niino et al.	21	23	33	65		89		9		41		45			59					131		0/93		0/689
Qinli Sun	9	17	37	35		91		15		29		51			59					131		0/005		0/689
Tajouri et al.	35	55	14	125		83		23		54		23			100					100		0/42		0/5
Smolders et al.	58	99	55	215		209		80		150		59			310					268		0/45		0/463
Bing Wu et al.	14	39	30	67		99		10		45		65			65					175		0/58		0/729
Simon et al.	29	45	26	103		97		28		50		22			106					94		0/97		0/47
Irizar et al.	39	60	35	138		130		76		178		86			330					350		0/37		0/514
Narooie-Nejad et al.	40	62	11	142		84		61		56		5			178					66		0/07		0/27
Al-Temaimi et al.	20	25	5	65		35		23		17		10			63					37		0/05		0/37
Selma et al.	14	36	10	64		56		40		58		16			138					90		0/48		0/394
Yamout et al.	19	22	9	60		40		33		51		15			117					81		0/51		0/503
Luisa Agnello et al.	31	58	15	120		88		26		41		8			93					57		0/16		0/38
Abdollahzadeh et al.	18	67	75	103		217		4		43		103			51					249		0/84		0/83
Cierny et al.	78	132	60	288		252		102		120		81			324					282		0/005		0/465
Terzi et al.	28	46	13	102		72		42		40		18			124					76		0/13		0/38
Yucel et al.	8	13	5	29		23		28		37		16			93					69		0/55		0/425
Kamisli et al.	62	76	29	200		134		54		67		25			175					117		0/59		0/4
Sadeghi et al.	22	53	5	97		63		23		22		5			68					32		0/93		0/32
Cakina et al..	28	27	15	83		57		20		21		29			61					79		0/001		0/564
Křenek et al.	27	183	86	237		355		31		78		26			140					130		0/07		0/481

P-HWE, p-value for Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; MAF, minor allele frequency of control group.

Table 3. Main results of pooled ORs in meta-analysis of Vitamin D Receptor Gene Polymorphisms.

Test of publication bias (Egger’s test)			Test of publication bias (Begg’s test)			Test of heterogeneity		Test of association				Sample size		Subgroup
P	T	P		Z		P	I² (%)		95% CI	OR	Case/Control		Genetic model
FokI (rs2228570)
0.29	-1.09	0.15		-1.44		0.02	45.7		0.94 – 1.19	1.06	3057 / 2852		Dominant model	Overall
0.90	0.13	0.45		0.78		0.14	23.8		0.81 - 1.13	0.96	3057 / 2852		Recessive model
0.65	0.46	0.52		0.63		≤0.001	66.6		0.93 - 1.26	1.08	3057 / 2852		Allelic model
0.54	-0.63	0.96		0.05		0.01	48.4		0.80 – 1.16	0.96	3057 / 2852		ff vs. FF
0.20	-1.33	0.15		-1.44		0.16	26.4		0.93 – 1.19	1.06	3057 / 2852		Ff vs.FF
0.55	-0.62	0.24		-1.16		0.08	41.7		0.97 – 1.26	1.10	2480 / 2202		Dominant model	European
0.84	0.20	0.24		1.16		0.10	38.1		0.80 – 1.15	0.96	2480 / 2202		Recessive model
0.75	-0.32	0.78		0.27		0.01	56.5		0.90– 1.20	1.04	2480 / 2202		Allelic model
0.86	-0.17	0.78		0.27		0.07	42.8		0.75 – 1.33	1.00	2480 / 2202		ff vs. FF
0.81	0.24	0.78		0.27		0.21	24.9		0.97 – 1.28	1.11	2480 / 2202		Ff vs.FF
0.54	-0.86	0.60		-0.52		0.03	70.9		0.68– 1.61	1.05	243 / 222		Dominant model	Asian
*	*	0.31		-1		0.12	57.9		0.21 – 7.61	1.27	243 / 222		Recessive model
0.77	-0.36	0.60		-0.52		≤0.001	80.9		0.46 – 2.45	1.06	243 / 222		Allelic model
*	*	0.31		1		0.01	84		0.02 – 14.1	0.51	243 / 222		ff vs. FF
0.42	-1.02	0.60		-0.52		0.17	43.5		0.60 – 1.45	0.93	243 / 222		Ff vs. FF
TaqI (rs731236)
0.71	0.38	0.89		-0.13		≤0.001	80.5		0.99 - 1.60	1.26	3758/3992		Dominant model	Overall
0.16	1.46	0.08		1.75		≤0.001	63		0.91- 1.57	0.19	3758/3992		Recessive model
0.81	0.24	0.38		-0.87		≤0.001	87.2		0.94 – 1.42	1.16	3758/3992		Allelic model
0.34	0.98	0.58			0.54	≤0.001	65.9		0.93 - 1.71	1.26	3758/3992		tt vs. TT
0.67	0.43	0.61			-0.50	≤0.001	74.5		1.01 - 1.59	1.27	3758/3992		Tt vs.TT
0.94	0.08	0.42			-0.80	0.90	0		0.99 – 1.25	1.11	2785 / 2706		Dominant model	European
0.27	1.14	0.24			1.17	0.63	0		0.88 – 1.23	1.04	2785 / 2706		Recessive model
0.96	0.05	0.12			-1.55	0.76	0		0.97 – 1.15	1.06	2785 / 2706		Allelic model
0.34	0.98	0.52			0.63	0.82	0		0.92 – 1.33	1.11	2785 / 2706		tt vs. TT
0.94	-0.08	0.47			-0.72	0.79	0		0.99 – 1.27	1.12	2785 / 2706		Tt vs.TT
0.82	-0.24	0.32			-0.98	≤0.001	95		0.34 – 6.95	1.53	453 / 471		Dominant model	Asian
0.84	0.22	1			0	≤0.001	84.4		0.55 – 16.2	2.98	453 / 471		Recessive model
0.59	-0.59	0.05			-1.96	≤0.001	96.9		0.40 – 5.13	1.43	453 / 471		Allelic model
0.87	0.18	1			0	≤0.001	90.5		0.41 – 41.8	4.13	453 / 471		tt vs. TT
0.81	-0.25	0.32			-0.98	≤0.001	91.7		0.38 – 4.54	1.31	453 / 471		Tt vs.TT
BsmI(rs1544410)
0.09	1.81	0.80			-0.24	≤0.001	91.3		0.48-1.49	0.84	1793 / 1815		Dominant model
0.12	1.67	0.35			0.93	≤0.001	62.9		0.92 – 1.85	1.30	1793 / 1815		Recessive model
0.82	0.23	0.85			0.18	≤0.001	69.7		0.89 – 1.37	1.10	1793 / 1815		Allelic model
0.59	-0.55	0.05			-1.95	≤0.001	64.9		0.78 – 1.99	1.24	1793 / 1815		bb vs. BB
0.12	-1.65	0.14			-1.46	0.02	49.6		0.96 – 1.37	1.15	1793 / 1815		Bb vs.BB
0.2	1.50	0.85			-0.19	≤0.001	93.3		0.25 – 1.55	0.62	896 / 764		Dominant model	European
0.16	1.84	0.14			1.47	0.66	0		0.65 – 1.09	0.84	896 / 764		Recessive model
0.22	-1.45	0.34			-0.94	0.51	0		0.85 – 1.16	0.99	896 / 764		Allelic model
0.28	-1.29	0.05			-1.96	0.46	0		0.76 – 1.50	1.07	896 / 764		bb vs. BB
0.07	-2.34	0.34			-0.94	0.05	54.1		0.72 – 1.62	1.08	896 / 764		Bb vs.BB
0.78	-0.30	1			0	≤0.001	78.5		0.54 – 2.22	1.09	676 / 771		Dominant model	Asian
0.35	-1.01	0.17			-1.35	0.09	44.2		1.08 – 2.93	1.78	676 / 771		Recessive model
0.80	0.26	0.69			-0.49	≤0.001	79		0.81 – 2.02	1.28	676 / 771		Allelic model
0.43	-0.97	0.17			-1.36	≤0.001	76.3		0.46– 4.88	1.50	676 / 771		bb vs. BB
0.91	-0.12	0.62			-0.49	0.01	66.9		0.59 – 1.96	1.08	676 / 771		Bb vs.BB
ApaI (rs7975232)
0.26	-1.14	0.21			-1.23	≤0.001	58		0.82 – 1.31	1.04	2306 / 2669		Dominant model
0.57	-0.57	0.55			-0.58	≤0.001	51		0.66 – 1.05	0.83	2306 / 2669		Recessive model
0.32	-1.02	0.58			-0.55	≤0.001	68.2		0.80– 1.10	0.94	2306 / 2669		Allelic model
0.22	-1.26	0.43			-0.78	≤0.001	55.1		0.63 – 1.16	0.85	2306 / 2669		aa vs. AA
0.53	-0.64	0.33			-0.97	≤0.001	72.2		0.88– 1.64	1.20	2306 / 2669		Aa vs. AA
0.84	0.21	1			0	0.04	49.8		0.87 – 1.47	1.13	1366 / 1539		Dominant model	European
0.64	-0.49	0.67			-0.42	0.11	38.7		0.78 – 1.33	1.01	1366 / 1539		Recessive model
0.59	-0.56	1			0	0.02	53.6		0.88 – 1.24	1.05	1366 / 1539		Allelic model
0.95	0.06	0.40			0.83	0.01	56.9		0.76 – 1.63	1.11	1366 / 1539		aa vs. AA
0.61	0.52	0.40			0.83	≤0.001	81.4		0.86– 2.31	1.41	1366 / 1539		Aa vs. AA
0.03	-2.67	0.08			-1.73	≤0.001	70.9		0.49 – 1.53	0.87	676 / 816		Dominant model	Asian
0.54	0.64	0.32			0.99	0.11	40.4		0.42 – 0.89	0.61	676 / 816		Recessive model
0.51	0.69	0.17			1.37	≤0.001	76.1		0.57 – 1.15	0.81	676 / 816		Allelic model
0.72	0.37	0.80			0.25	0.20	28		0.32 – 0.86	0.52	676 / 816		aa vs. AA
0.07	-2.17	0.02			-2.23	≤0.001	64.5		0.59- 1.79	1.03	676 / 816		Aa vs. AA

Supplementaryfigure.docx

Association between Vitamin D receptor (VDR) polymorphisms and the risk of Multiple sclerosis (MS): An updated meta-analysis

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 2

Abstract

Figures

1. background

2. methods

3. results

4. discussion

conclusion

abbreviations

declarations

references

tables

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 2