Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research article
  • Open Access
  • Open Peer Review

Association of genetic polymorphisms in vascular endothelial growth factor with susceptibility to coronary artery disease: a meta–analysis

BMC Medical Genetics201819:108

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12881-018-0628-3

  • Received: 7 December 2017
  • Accepted: 18 June 2018
  • Published:
Open Peer Review reports

Abstract

Background

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) located in the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene may be correlated with the susceptibility to coronary artery disease (CAD) – although results have been controversial. The aim of this meta–analysis is to clarify the effects of VEGF –2578A/C (rs699947), −1154G/A (rs1570360), +405C/G (rs2010963), and + 936C/T (rs3025039) polymorphisms on CAD risk.

Methods

Pooled odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the strength of the association between VEGF gene polymorphisms and CAD risk. Fixed- or random-effects model was used depending on the heterogeneity between studies.

Results

In total, 13 eligible articles containing 29 studies were analysed. The pooled analysis indicated that the VEGF gene polymorphisms of rs699947, rs2010963, and rs3025039 were associated with an increased risk of CAD, whereas no significant associations were observed with the rs1570360 polymorphism. A subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity revealed that the rs699947 and rs3025039 polymorphisms were associated with CAD risk in Asian populations. In addition, stratification by control source indicated an increased risk of CAD susceptibility with the rs699947 polymorphism for population–based studies of reduced heterogeneity.

Conclusions

In summary, we concluded that the VEGF gene polymorphisms rs699947, rs2010963, and rs3025039 are correlated with an elevated CAD risk.

Keywords

  • Vascular endothelial growth factor
  • Coronary artery disease
  • Gene polymorphisms
  • Meta-analysis

Background

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is and will remain the main cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide [1]. CAD is a chronic, progressive, and polygenic disease, and atherosclerosis is appears to be the major pathophysiological process underlying CAD [2]. The roles of endothelial dysfunction and angiogenesis in atherosclerosis development have been widely reported [3, 4]. Endothelial dysfunction, which is frequently triggered by smoking, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, hyperglycaemia, and insulin resistance, may influence the balance between endothelium–dependent vasoconstriction and vasodilatation, the upregulation of cytokines, adhesion molecule expression, leukocyte and monocyte migration, and platelet activation [5, 6]. Moreover, angiogenesis may be related to disturbances in endothelial cell physiology. These complex, associated processes of endothelial dysfunction and angiogenesis require the participation of various growth factors.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), an essential component of angiogenesis, has been reported to induce endothelial cell migration and proliferation, enhance vascular permeability, and modulate thrombogenicity [79]. The VEGF family includes VEGF–A, VEGF–B, VEGF–C, VEGF–D, VEGF–E, VEGF–F, and placental growth factor, and all these growth factors perform their functions by interacting with high–affinity receptor tyrosine kinases [10]. The VEGF gene is located in chromosome 6p21.3 and contains a 14–kb coding region with eight exons and seven introns [11]. It is expressed in various cell types, such as endothelial cells, vascular smooth muscle cells, macrophages, and several tumour cells. Molecular biology studies have confirmed that VEGF expression is regulated by certain single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which have tissue- and age-specific expression patterns [1215]. Furthermore, VEGF gene variability may be of particular interest for many angiogenesis–associated diseases, such as tumours, osteosarcoma, age–related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and chronic immune–mediated inflammatory diseases [1620].

Some of these polymorphisms, including VEGF –2578A/C (rs699947), −1154G/A (rs1570360), +405C/G (rs2010963), and + 936C/T (rs3025039), which arise from the vascular expression of different VEGF proteins, have been associated with CAD susceptibility; however, these findings are controversial. For example, Han et al. [21] indicated that two VEGF SNPs (rs2010963 and rs3025039) were associated with CAD susceptibility in a Chinese population. Similarly, Li et al. [22] also reported that the C allele of VEGF (rs699947) may be an important independent risk factor for susceptibility to CAD. However, other studies have drawn opposite conclusions. Biselli et al. [23] suggested a possible protective effect of the rs699947 polymorphism on CAD severity because of a reduced VEGF expression.

The existence of a correlation between VEGF gene SNPs and CAD susceptibility remains controversial and inconclusive. Moreover, no relevant meta–analyses have been published. Consequently, we performed a meta–analysis to investigate the association between VEGF gene polymorphisms and CAD risk.

Methods

Literature search strategy

The literature search was conducted by two authors (Ma and Han). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched. The keywords and terms used for the searches included the following: “vascular endothelial growth factor” OR “VEGF” OR “–2578 A/C” OR “+405C/G” OR “+936C/T” OR “–1154G/A” OR “rs699947” OR “rs3025039” OR “rs2010963” OR “rs1570360”; “genetic polymorphism” OR “mutation” OR “variant” OR “genotype”; and “angina” OR “myocardial infarction” OR “atherosclerosis” OR “acute coronary syndrome” OR “coronary artery disease” OR “coronary heart disease”. Hand–searching of reference lists in relevant articles was also performed. The last search was conducted on October 24, 2017.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Eligible studies in our meta–analysis complied with the following criteria: 1) case–control studies evaluating VEGF gene polymorphisms (rs699947, rs2010963, rs3025039, and rs1570360) and CAD susceptibility; 2) all CAD cases were documented by angiographic evidence showing at least 50% stenosis of one major coronary artery, myocardial infarction (MI), or coronary artery bypass surgery; 3) sufficient published data, such as the total number of cases and controls, distribution of genotypes, and other relevant information; and 4) language was restricted to English. Studies were excluded if they met the following criteria: 1) letters to the editor, abstracts, animal studies, or reviews; 2) data overlapping with previous publications; and 3) studies with unusable or insufficient data.

Data extraction

Following the Meta–analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines for reporting meta–analyses of observational studies (Additional file 1: Table S1), data from eligible studies were separately extracted by two authors (Ma and Zhu), and eligibility disagreements were discussed and resolved by a third author (Liu). For each eligible study, data included information regarding the author, year of publication, number of cases and controls, country, ethnicity, genotyping methods, genotype frequency in cases and controls, sources of controls, and Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in controls.

Quality assessment

The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) quality score was applied to assess the quality of each eligible study. Validated quality assessment consisted of three parameters, including selection, comparability, and exposure. NOS scores ranged from 0 and 9 stars. Studies with an NOS score of five or greater were deemed moderate to high quality, whereas studies with an NOS score of less than five were considered low quality.

Statistics analysis

All calculations and graphs were performed by Review Manager v5.2 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 12.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were selected to estimate the strength of the association. For the VEGF rs6699947 polymorphism, pooled ORs were obtained for dominant (CC + AC vs. AA), recessive (CC vs. AA + AC), homozygous (CC vs. AA), heterozygous (AC vs. AA), and allele (C vs. A) genetic models. Similar genetic models were also used to assess the rs2010963, rs3025039, and rs1570360 polymorphisms. The Cochrane Q–test and index (I 2) were used to assess the heterogeneity within studies. A Q–test with P < 0.10 indicated significant heterogeneity. I2 values of 0–25, 25–50%, and > 50% represented mild, moderate, and high–level heterogeneity, respectively. A fixed– or random–effects model was used to calculate OR and 95% CIs based on the study heterogeneity strength. Subsequently, a subgroup analysis was performed to search for potential sources of heterogeneity. If there was an appropriate number of included studies, subgroup analyses based on ethnicity (Asian and Caucasian populations), control source (population–based and hospital–based controls), and sample size (studies with more than 500 subjects were categorized as “large” and studies with less 500 subjects were categorized as “small”), and the type of CAD were performed to detect the sources of the heterogeneity. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the stability of the individual studies. Possible publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger’s linear regression test.

Results

Study selection and characteristics

A total of 1488 articles were retrieved following the initial search. Of these publications, 915 were excluded due to duplicate records, 33 articles were determined to be ineligible after the screening of the titles and abstracts, and 20 articles were excluded after reading the full texts because of insufficient data, ineligible samples, or by virtue of being a review or conference abstract. Ultimately, thirteen eligible articles containing 29 studies met our inclusion criteria [2133]. The study selection process is summarized in Fig. 1. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the NOS quality score (Additional file 1: Table S2).
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Flow chart of the selection of eligible studies for the meta–analysis

The data from the eligible studies are displayed in Table 1. Eight studies containing 2471 cases and 2811 controls found an association between the VEGF rs699947 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD. Ten studies involving 2303 cases and 2862 controls focused on the relationship between the VEGF rs2010963 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD. Eight studies of the VEGF rs3025039 polymorphism included 2136 cases and 2477 controls, and three VEGF rs1570360 polymorphism studies included 1227 cases and 1166 controls. The group of controls consisted of healthy volunteers from the community or patients who underwent health examinations in the hospital. Twelve studies were based on Caucasian samples, and seventeen studies used Asian samples. The countries in which the eligible studies were conducted included Brazil, China, Finland, Iran, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom. The distribution of genotypes in the controls was tested in 29 studies and found to be mostly consistent with HWE, except for two studies [31].
Table 1

Characteristics of the individual studies included in the meta–analysis

Study

Country

Ethnicity

Disease

Control Source

Genotyping Methods

Sample Size Cases/Controls

Genotype Distribution

PHWE

NOS

Cases

Controls

rs699947

      

AA/AC/CC

AA/AC/CC

  

Biselli 200823

Brazil

Caucasian

CAD

HB

PCR

175/108

32/96/47

27/51/30

0.569

6

Kangas–Kontio 200925

Finland

Caucasian

MI

HB

TaqMan

188/218

64/87/37

77/101/40

0.498

7

Chen 201126

UK

Caucasian

MI

PB

PCR–RFLP

46/372

10/34/2

100/167/105

0.050

8

Amoli 201227

Iran

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR

50/50

9/26/15

14/27/9

0.520

6

Cui 201328

China

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR

242/253

27/78/137

12/69/172

0.148

6

Gu 201329

China

Asian

CAD

HB

MassARRAY

427/472

30/178/219

31/174/267

0.713

6

Li 201622

China

Asian

CAD

PB

PCR

533/533

180/250/103

217/237/79

0.280

8

Liu 201631

China

Asian

CAD

PB

PCR

810/805

275/381/154

339/345/121

0.03

8

rs2010963

      

GG/GC/CC

GG/GC/CC

  

Petrovic 200724

Slovenia

Caucasian

MI

PB

PCR

143/228

42/76/25

103/104/21

0.470

7

Kangas–Kontio 200925

Finland

Caucasian

MI

HB

TaqMan

186/218

113/61/12

143/67/8

0.966

7

Chen 201126

UK

Caucasian

MI

PB

PCR–RFLP

46/372

26/19/1

174/159/39

0.765

8

Cui 201328

China

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR

242/253

75/102/65

104/114/35

0.675

6

Gu 201329

China

Asian

CAD

HB

MassARRAY

419/468

144/215/60

154/225/89

0.672

6

Douvaras 201332

Greece

Caucasian

MI

HB

PCR–RFLP

102/98

37/49/16

29/55/14

> 0.050

7

Moradzadegan 201530

Iran

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR–RFLP

141/369

43/65/33

85/197/87

0.193

7

Han 201521

China

Asian

CAD

HB

MassARRAY

144/150

69/49/26

86/54/10

0.701

6

Li 201622

China

Asian

CAD

PB

PCR

533/533

50/233/250

71/239/223

0.583

8

Nia 201733

Iran

Asian

CAD

HB

TaqMan

347/173

167/135/45

102/63/8

> 0.050

7

rs3025039

      

CC/CT/TT

CC/CT/TT

  

Biselli 200823

Brazil

Caucasian

CAD

HB

PCR

175/108

133/36/6

83/23/2

0.783

6

Kangas–Kontio 200925

Finland

Caucasian

MI

HB

TaqMan

187/218

140/42/5

155/56/7

0.488

7

Chen 201126

UK

Caucasian

MI

PB

PCR–RFLP

46/372

37/8/1

264/95/13

0.229

8

Cui 201328

China

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR

242/253

133/95/14

159/86/8

0.373

6

Gu 201329

China

Asian

CAD

HB

MassARRAY

430/473

272/142/16

300/159/14

0.194

6

Douvaras 201332

Greece

Caucasian

MI

HB

PCR–RFLP

102/98

68/30/4

69/27/2

> 0.050

7

Han 201521

China

Asian

CAD

HB

MassARRAY

144/150

84/55/5

115/31/4

0.290

6

Liu 201631

China

Asian

CAD

PB

PCR

810/805

472/308/30

617/167/21

0.020

8

rs1570360

      

GG/GA/AA

GG/GA/AA

  

Biselli 200823

Brazil

Caucasian

CAD

HB

PCR

175/108

96/61/18

57/38/13

0.104

6

Cui 201328

China

Asian

CAD

HB

PCR

242/253

151/79/12

172/69/12

0.148

6

Liu 201631

China

Asian

CAD

PB

PCR

810/805

54/370/386

137/456/212

> 0.050

8

Abbreviations: CAD coronary artery disease; MI myocardial infarction; PCR polymerase chain reaction; PCR–RFLP polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism; HWE Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; PB population–based; HB hospital–based; NOS Newcastle–Ottawa quality scale; UK the United Kingdom

Association between the rs699947 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD

For all studies, the meta–analysis showed an increased risk between the rs699947 polymorphism and CAD susceptibility in the heterozygous genetic model (AC vs. AA: OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10–1.45) with a low between–study heterogeneity. No significant associations were observed in the dominant (CC + AC vs. AA: OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.93–1.47), recessive (CC vs. AA + AC: OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.71–1.31), homozygous (CC vs. AA: OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.71–1.55), and allele (C vs. A: OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.83–1.23) genetic models (Table 2; Additional file 1: Figs. S1-S5). Stratification by ethnicity indicated that the rs699947 polymorphism was significantly associated with CAD risk in Asian populations compared to Caucasian populations under the heterozygous genetic model (AC vs. AA: OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.07–1.46). In the subgroup analysis stratified by the control source, we observed a significantly increased risk of CAD susceptibility in the dominant genetic model (CC + AC vs. AA: OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.19–1.61) within population–based studies with reduced heterogeneity. A similar result was also detected for the heterozygous genetic model. When we conducted a subgroup analysis by sample size, the same significant associations were observed in studies with large sample sizes in dominant and heterozygous genetic models with a low heterogeneity (Table 2).
Table 2

Summary of odds ratios (95% CI) in the analysis of the relationship between VEGF gene polymorphisms in rs699947 and coronary artery disease susceptibility

Genetic Model

Overall and Subgroups

N

Test of Association

Test of Heterogeneity

 

OR

95%CI

P –value

P Heterogeneity

I2 (%)

 

Overall

8

1.17

0.93,1.47

0.170

0.040

52%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.10

0.83,1.47

0.520

0.050

53%

 

PB

3

1.38

1.19,1.61

0.000

0.950

0%

CC+ AC vs. AA

HB

5

0.99

0.65,1.51

0.970

0.040

65%

 

Large sample size

3

1.34

1.16,1.56

0.000

0.340

8%

 

Small sample size

5

1.06

0.67,1.68

0.800

0.040

61%

 

Asians

5

1.11

0.79,1.55

0.550

0.009

71%

 

Caucasians

3

1.21

0.89,1.64

0.220

0.620

0%

 

Overall

8

0.96

0.71,1.31

0.800

0.000

75%

 

HWE (yes)

7

0.90

0.63,1.27

0.550

0.000

74%

 

PB

3

0.98

0.53,1.80

0.950

0.003

83%

CC vs. AA+ AC

HB

5

0.87

0.66,1.14

0.320

0.130

45

 

Large sample

3

1.13

0.80,1.60

0.480

0.010

78%

 

Small sample

5

0.80

0.47,1.37

0.420

0.006

73%

 

Asians

5

0.99

0.74,1.48

0.790

0.000

79%

 

Caucasians

3

0.65

0.27,1.56

0.340

0.010

78%

 

Overall

8

1.26

1.10,1.45

0.001

0.210

27%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.20

1.00,1.44

0.050

0.180

32%

 

PB

3

1.36

1.15,1.60

0.000

0.510

0%

AC vs. AA

HB

5

1.05

0.81,1.37

0.710

0.210

32%

 

Large sample

3

1.30

1.11,1.52

0.001

0.680

0%

 

Small sample

5

1.16

0.88,1.54

0.290

0.080

53%

 

Asians

5

1.25

1.07,1.46

0.005

0.150

41%

 

Caucasians

3

1.33

0.97,1.83

0.080

0.250

29%

 

Overall

8

1.05

0.71,1.55

0.810

0.001

72%

 

HWE (yes)

7

0.95

0.59,1.53

0.770

0.001

72%

 

PB

3

1.29

0.77,2.17

0.340

0.030

72%

CC vs. AA

HB

5

0.95

0.57,1.60

0.850

0.020

65%

 

Large sample

3

1.36

0.99,1.88

0.060

0.110

54%

 

Small sample

5

0.82

0.39,1.71

0.600

0.004

74%

 

Asians

5

1.12

0.68,1.83

0.660

0.001

79%

 

Caucasians

3

0.88

0.41,1.89

0.740

0.070

62%

 

Overall

8

1.01

0.83,1.23

0.930

0.000

80%

 

HWE (yes)

7

0.96

0.77,1.21

0.750

0.000

77%

 

PB

3

1.14

0.90,1.45

0.280

0.020

73%

C vs. A

HB

5

0.95

0.73,1.22

0.680

0.008

71%

 

Large sample

3

1.13

0.90,1.43

0.290

0.005

81%

 

Small sample

5

0.92

0.67,1.27

0.620

0.005

73%

 

Asians

5

1.04

0.79,1.37

0.790

0.000

86%

 

Caucasians

3

0.97

0.75,1.26

0.820

0.180

42%

Abbreviations: N number of studies; OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; HB hospital–based; PB population–based; P–Value, P value for association; P Heterogeneity, P value for heterogeneity

Association between the rs2010963 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD

A significant association between rs2010963 polymorphism and CAD risk was found under the recessive and homozygous genetic models (CC vs. GG + GC: OR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.03–2.05; CC vs. GG: OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.02–2.42) (Table 3; Additional file 1: Figs. S6-S10). Stratification by sample size indicated that the rs2010963 polymorphism was significantly associated with CAD risk for small sample sizes compared to large sample sizes in several genetic models (CC vs. GG + GC: OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.01–2.33; CC vs. GG: OR = 2.03, 95% CI = 1.26–3.28; C vs. G: OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.03–1.78). No significant associations were observed following a subgroup analysis by ethnicity and control source (Table 3).
Table 3

Summary of odds ratios (95% CI) in the analysis of the relationship between VEGF gene polymorphisms in rs2010963 and coronary artery disease susceptibility

Genetic Model

Overall and Subgroups

N

Test of Association

Test of Heterogeneity

 

OR

95%CI

P –value

P Heterogeneity

I2 (%)

 

Overall

10

1.18

0.94,1.48

0.140

0.002

65%

 

PB

3

1.31

0.77,2.25

0.320

0.020

74%

CC + GC vs. GG

HB

7

1.13

0.88,1.44

0.340

0.010

62%

 

Large sample size

4

1.11

0.77,1.58

0.580

0.009

74%

 

Small sample size

6

1.25

0.92,1.68

0.150

0.030

60%

 

Asians

6

1.22

0.93,1.59

0.140

0.010

67%

 

Caucasians

4

1.09

0.68,1.76

0.720

0.010

72%

 

Overall

10

1.45

1.03,2.05

0.030

0.000

74%

 

PB

3

1.26

0.64,2.48

0.500

0.050

67%

CC vs. GG + GC

HB

7

1.56

0.97,2.53

0.070

0.000

79%

 

Large sample size

4

1.43

0.74,2.74

0.290

0.000

72%

 

Small sample size

6

1.52

1.01,2.33

0.040

0.050

55%

 

Asians

6

1.50

0.98,2.31

0.060

0.000

82%

 

Caucasians

4

1.35

0.70,2.60

0.370

0.110

51%

 

Overall

10

1.18

0.90,1.57

0.240

0.000

76%

 

PB

3

1.32

0.88,1.98

0.180

0.130

51%

GC vs. GG

HB

7

1.14

0.79,1.64

0.490

0.000

81%

 

Large sample size

4

1.28

0.72,2.28

0.400

0.060

65%

 

Small sample size

6

1.14

0.89,1.46

0.290

0.190

32%

 

Asians

6

1.25

0.85,1.84

0.260

0.000

83%

 

Caucasians

4

1.08

0.72,1.63

0.710

0.060

59%

 

Overall

10

1.57

1.02,2.42

0.040

0.000

77%

 

PB

3

1.47

0.60,3.63

0.400

0.020

74%

CC vs. GG

HB

7

1.60

0.93,2.77

0.090

0.000

81%

 

Large sample size

4

1.24

0.68,2.28

0.480

0.000

71%

 

Small sample size

6

2.03

1.26,3.28

0.007

0.070

50%

 

Asians

6

1.62

0.94,2.79

0.080

0.000

84%

 

Caucasians

4

1.40

0.42,4.61

0.580

0.002

73%

 

Overall

10

1.19

0.98,1.44

0.080

0.000

78%

 

PB

3

1.15

0.77,1.73

0.500

0.006

81%

C vs. G

HB

7

1.20

0.94,1.53

0.140

0.000

80%

 

Large sample size

4

1.10

0.84,1.43

0.490

0.001

814%

 

Small sample size

6

1.27

1.03,1.78

0.030

0.010

72%

 

Asians

6

1.24

0.98,1.58

0.070

0.000

83%

 

Caucasians

4

1.08

0.73,1.60

0.690

0.006

76%

Abbreviations: N number of studies; OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; HB hospital–based; PB population–based; P–Value, P value for association; P Heterogeneity, P value for heterogeneity

Association between the rs3025039 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD

Meta–analysis of the rs3025039 polymorphism showed an elevated risk of CAD in the homozygous genetic model (TT vs. CC: OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.10–2.17) with a low between–study heterogeneity. No significant associations were observed in the remaining genetic models (TT+ CT vs. CC: OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 0.89–1.79; TT vs. CC + CT: OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.98–1.93; CT vs. CC: OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.86–1.80; T vs. C: OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.93–1.62) (Table 4; Additional file 1: Figs. S11-S15). The subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity indicated that the rs3025039 polymorphism was significantly associated with CAD in Asian populations compared to Caucasian populations for all genetic models, except for the dominant and recessive genetic models. Stratification by sample size indicated that the rs3025039 polymorphism was significantly associated with CAD for large sample sizes in the homozygous genetic model. No significant associations were observed in the subgroup analysis stratified by the control source (Table 4).
Table 4

Summary of odds ratios (95% CI) in the analysis of the relationship between VEGF gene polymorphisms in rs3025039 and coronary artery disease susceptibility

Genetic Model

Overall and Subgroups

N

Test of Association

Test of Heterogeneity

 

OR

95%CI

P –value

P Heterogeneity

I2 (%)

 

Overall

8

1.26

0.89,1.79

0.200

0.000

84%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.14

0.86,1.50

0.360

0.020

59%

 

PB

2

1.24

0.32,4.77

0.750

0.000

91%

TT + CT vs. CC

HB

6

1.17

0.82,1.65

0.390

0.020

63%

 

Large sample size

2

1.55

0.67,3.54

0.300

0.000

96%

 

Small sample size

6

1.15

0.76,1.75

0.500

0.008

71%

 

Asians

4

1.17

0.82,1.65

0.390

0.020

63%

 

Caucasians

4

0.91

0.69,1.20

0.40

0.490

0%

 

Overall

8

1.38

0.98,1.93

0.060

0.950

0%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.35

0.88,2.05

0.170

0.910

0%

 

PB

2

1.34

0.78,2.29

0.290

0.430

0%

TT vs. CC + CT

HB

6

1.40

0.91,2.17

0.130

0.910

0%

 

Large sample size

2

1.37

0.88,2.14

0.170

0.790

0%

 

Small sample size

6

1.40

0.91,2.17

0.130

0.910

0%

 

Asians

4

1.45

0.99,2.12

0.060

0.920

0%

 

Caucasians

4

1.14

0.55,2.36

0.730

0.710

0%

 

Overall

8

1.24

0.86,1.80

0.250

0.000

84%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.11

0.84,1.47

0.440

0.030

58%

 

PB

2

1.27

0.33,4.95

0.730

0.001

91%

CT vs. CC

HB

6

1.18

0.89,1.56

0.250

0.040

58%

 

Large sample size

2

1.55

0.64,3.72

0.330

0.000

96%

 

Small sample size

6

1.18

0.89,1.56

0.250

0.040

58%

 

Asians

4

1.64

1.01,2.69

0.050

0.000

89%

 

Caucasians

4

0.89

0.66,1.19

0.410

0.640

0%

 

Overall

8

1.55

1.10,2.17

0.010

0.830

0%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.39

0.91,2.13

0.120

0.820

0%

 

PB

2

1.67

0.98,2.85

0.060

0.260

21%

TT vs. CC

HB

6

1.47

0.95,2.28

0.080

0.830

0%

 

Large sample size

2

1.61

1.03,2.53

0.040

0.410

0%

 

Small sample size

6

1.47

0.95,2.28

0.080

0.830

0%

 

Asians

4

1.70

1.16,2.50

0.007

0.810

0%

 

Caucasians

4

1.10

0.53,2.28

0.810

0.650

0%

 

Overall

8

1.23

0.93,1.62

0.140

0.000

80%

 

HWE (yes)

7

1.13

0.91,1.42

0.270

0.040

54%

 

PB

2

1.17

0.38,3.57

0.780

0.002

90%

T vs. C

HB

6

1.19

0.96,1.48

0.110

0.070

51%

 

Large sample size

2

1.43

0.76,2.70

0.270

0.000

95%

 

Small sample size

6

1.19

0.96,1.48

0.110

0.070

51%

 

Asians

4

1.50

1.06,2.13

0.020

0.000

85%

 

Caucasians

4

0.94

0.74,1.21

0.640

0.390

0%

Abbreviations: N number of studies; OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; HB hospital–based; PB population–based; P–Value, P value for association; P Heterogeneity, P value for heterogeneity

Association between the rs1570360 polymorphism and susceptibility to CAD

No significant associations were observed between the rs1570360 polymorphism and CAD susceptibility in all genetic models (Table 5). Due to the limited number of eligible studies on rs1570360, no further subgroup analysis was performed.
Table 5

Summary of odds ratios (95% CI) in the analysis of the relationship between VEGF gene polymorphisms in rs1570360 and coronary artery disease susceptibility

Genetic Model

N

Test of Association

Test of Heterogeneity

OR

95%CI

P –value

P Heterogeneity

I2 (%)

AA + GA vs. GG

3

1.52

0.77,3.00

0.220

0.000

89%

AA vs. GG + GA

3

1.40

0.62,3.15

0.410

0.004

82%

GA vs. GG

3

1.41

0.91,2.18

0.120

0.040

70%

AA vs. GG

3

1.70

0.50,5.73

0.390

0.000

91%

A vs. G

3

1.32

0.81,2.16

0.260

0.000

90%

Abbreviations: N number of studies; OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; P–Value, P value for association; P Heterogeneity, P value for heterogeneity

Sensitivity analysis

The influence of each study on the overall meta–analysis was evaluated by excluding each study at a time. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our meta-analysis and indicated that no individual study significantly affected the pooled result (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Sensitivity analysis on the association between VEGF gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to CAD. a Sensitivity analysis for rs699947 and CAD risk; b Sensitivity analysis for rs2010963 and CAD risk; c Sensitivity analysis for rs3025039 and CAD risk; (d) Sensitivity analysis for rs1570360 and CAD risk. Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval

Publication Bias

We performed funnel plots and Egger’s test to assess the publication bias of the included studies. A funnel plot was not constructed for the 3 rs1570360 studies. The funnel plot distribution of distinct studies appeared nearly symmetrical (Fig. 3). Moreover, Egger’s test failed to show statistically significant asymmetry in dominant genetic models (rs699947: t = − 1.21, P = 0.270; rs2010963: t = − 0.62, P = 0.551; rs3025039: t = − 2.07, P = 0.086; rs1570360: t = − 3.05, P = 0.787).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Funnel plot for studies investigating the effect of VEGF gene polymorphisms on CAD risk. a Funnel plot for publication bias on the rs699947 polymorphism; b Funnel plot for publication bias on the rs2010963 polymorphism; c Funnel plot for publication bias on the rs3025039 polymorphism. Abbreviation: OR = odds ratio

Discussion

VEGFs have been reported to alleviate complications closely linked to CAD by promoting the recanalization of thrombus-blocked blood vessels, establishing collateral circulation against myocardial ischaemia, and improving endothelium-dependent vasodilatation [9, 34, 35]. However, despite the important impacts of hereditary factors on CAD development, a link between VEGF SNPs and CAD risk has yet to be sufficiently elucidated.

In this meta–analysis, we analysed 29 eligible studies and found that rs699947, rs2010963, and rs3025020 polymorphisms increased CAD susceptibility, suggesting that these polymorphisms may be risk factors for CAD. However, the rs1570360 polymorphism failed to yield an association with CAD. One possible explanation for this finding is that the functional polymorphisms of rs699947, rs2010963, and rs3025020 may have more profound effects on angiogenesis than other SNPs. This discrepancy may also result in inter-individual differences in CAD incidence. The findings reported here are in agreement with some studies [21, 28] but not others [23]. The estimated pooled OR did not obviously change when non-HWE studies were excluded, suggesting the stability of the results. Subgroup analysis based on ethnicity identified an association between VEGF gene (rs699947 and rs3025039) polymorphisms and CAD, especially in Asian populations. This discrepancy may be due to genetic heterogeneity among different ethnicities. Moreover, to relieve heterogeneity bias within Asian and small sample size subgroups, stratified analysis was performed and suggested that ethnicity and sample size may be potential sources of heterogeneity. In addition, NOS quality assessment showed no obvious publication bias in our study, which supports the reliability of the conclusions.

Whether VEGF is a pro–atherosclerotic or anti–atherosclerotic factor is currently under debate. Some studies have reported that VEGF plays a role in blood vessel growth and the regulation of vessel wall integrity by promoting regeneration of endothelial cells, enhancing endothelial function, and slowing smooth muscle differentiation [34, 36, 37]. Grosskreutz et al. [38] observed that VEGF expression accelerates re-endothelialisation and reduces intimal thickening and thrombus formation. Howell et al. [39] also reported that higher VEGF expression has a protective effect in atherosclerosis development. In contrast, other studies have shown that VEGF induces atherosclerosis via promotion of vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation and plaque neovascularization [35, 40]. Eaton et al. [41] reported that elevated levels of VEGF were significantly associated with CAD mortality after 13 years of follow–up. Additionally, recent evidence has suggested that low VEGF levels may be needed to maintain vascular homeostasis, whereas upregulated VEGF has been observed in active angiogenesis processes during acute or stable ischaemic myocardium [4244]. Overall, these data suggest that changes in VEGF levels may reflect the progressive stages of angiogenesis activity.

Several association studies have reported that the + 405 C/G, +936C/T, and − 2578 A/C polymorphisms have an impact on VEGF protein synthesis [12, 39, 45]. However, several functional SNPs in the VEGF gene may contribute to CAD development, possibly by altering VEGF expression or protein activity. It is important to note that several stimulatory factors associated with hypoxia, oxidative stress, hyperglycaemia, hormones, and cytokines can influence plasma VEGF levels [9, 24, 46]. Furthermore, since –2578A/C is in strong linkage disequilibrium with –1154G/A, carriers of the risk allele − 2578 C will in most cases also be carriers of the − 1154 An allele, which appears to lead to enhanced VEGF expression [47]. Based on the above analysis, we speculate that variations in the VEGF gene may be susceptibility factors and outcome predictors for CAD.

Several limitations in our meta–analysis should be addressed. First, heterogeneity may have influenced the interpretation of our results. The limited number of studies with small sample sizes may have influenced the reliability of the conclusions; however, the heterogeneity was reduced by the subgroup analysis. Moreover, further relevant studies may supplement the present conclusions. Second, because of the limitation of the available data that were extracted from each selected study, our results were based on unadjusted estimates, which may produce misleading results. Third, despite searching comprehensive databases, only Asian and Caucasian populations were included in our meta–analysis. Ethnicity bias may exist in our analysis, and the conclusions may not be applicable to other races. Fourth, in our meta-analysis, the case group of several eligible studies consisted of patients with MI only. Most MIs occur due to CAD, despite the pathophysiology of MI is partly different from that of CAD. This discrepancy may increase the clinical heterogeneity among the studies.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the current meta-analysis supports the existence of an association between VEGF gene polymorphisms (rs699947, rs2010963, and rs3025039) and susceptibility to CAD, especially in Asian populations. Although a subgroup analysis was used to investigate the source of the heterogeneity, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Abbreviations

CAD: 

Coronary artery disease

CIs: 

Confidence intervals

HWE: 

Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium

MI: 

Myocardial infarction

MOOSE: 

Meta–analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology

NOS: 

Newcastle–Ottawa Scale

ORs: 

Odds ratios

SNPs: 

Single nucleotide polymorphisms

VEGF: 

Vascular endothelial growth factor

Declarations

Funding

This work was supported by National Nature Science Foundation of China (No. 81770451). The funding body had no role in the design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of this study.

Availability of data and materials

The articles included in this meta-analysis can be found in the respective journals.

Authors’ contributions

WQM was in charge of conceived and designed the study. WQM, YW and XQH were responsible for collection of data and performing the statistical analysis and manuscript preparation. NFL and YZ were responsible for checking the data. All authors read and approved the final version.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Cardiology, Zhongda Hospital, School of Medicine, Southeast University, 87 Dingjiaqiao, Nanjing, 210009, People’s Republic of China

References

  1. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, Arnett DK, Blaha MJ, Cushman M, Das SR, de Ferranti S, Despres JP, Fullerton HJ, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2016 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133(4):e38–e360.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Hansson GK. Inflammation, atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(16):1685–95.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Sitia S, Tomasoni L, Atzeni F, Ambrosio G, Cordiano C, Catapano A, Tramontana S, Perticone F, Naccarato P, Camici P, et al. From endothelial dysfunction to atherosclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2010;9(12):830–4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chung NA, Lydakis C, Belgore F, Li-Saw-Hee FL, Blann AD, Lip GYH. Angiogenesis, thrombogenesis, endothelial dysfunction and angiographic severity of coronary artery disease. Heart. 2003;89(12):1411–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Sena CM, Pereira AM, Seiça R. Endothelial dysfunction-a major mediator of diabetic vascular disease. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1832(12):2216–31.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kolluru GK, Bir SC, Kevil CG. Endothelial dysfunction and diabetes: effects on angiogenesis, vascular remodeling, and wound healing. Int J Vasc Med. 2012;2012:918267.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Wang S, Li X, Parra M, Verdin E, Bassel-Duby R, Olson EN. Control of endothelial cell proliferation and migration by VEGF signaling to histone deacetylase 7. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(22):7738–43.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Inoue M, Itoh H, Ueda M, Naruko T, Kojima A, Komatsu R. K, Ogawa Y, Tamura N, Takaya K, et al. vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression in human coronary atherosclerotic lesions. Circulation. 1998;98(20):2108–16.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferrara N. Molecular and biological properties of vascular endothelial growth factor. J Mol Med (Berl). 1999;77(7):527–43.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Tamura K, Amano T, Satoh T, Saito D, Yonei-Tamura S, Yajima H. Expression of rigf, a member of avian VEGF family, correlates with vascular patterning in the developing chick limb bud. Mech Dev. 2003;120(2):199–209.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brogan IJ, Khan N, Isaac K, Hutchinson JA, Pravica V, Hutchinson IV. Novel polymorphisms in the promoter and 5'UTR regions of the human vascular endothelial growth factor gene. Hum Immunol 1999; 60(12):1245–1249.Google Scholar
  12. Ruggiero D, Dalmasso C, Nutile T, Sorice R, Dionisi L, Aversano M, Broet P, Leutenegger AL, Bourgain C, Ciullo M. Genetics of VEGF serum variation in human isolated populations of cilento: importance of VEGF polymorphisms. PLoS One. 2011;6(2):e16982.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Pantsulaia I, Trofimov S, Kobyliansky E, Livshits G. Heritability of circulating growth factors involved in the angiogenesis in healthy human population. Cytokine. 2004;27(6):152–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Al-Habboubi HH, Sater MS, Almawi AW, Al-Khateeb GM, Almawi WY. Contribution of VEGF polymorphisms to variation in VEGF serum levels in a healthy population. Eur Cytokine Netw. 2011;22(3):154–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hofstaetter JG, Saad FA, Sunk IG, Bobacz K, Friehs I, Glimcher MJ. Age-dependent expression of VEGF isoforms and receptors in the rabbit anterior cruciate ligament. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2007;1770(7):997–1002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hu GL, Ma G, Ming JH. Impact of common SNPs in VEGF gene on the susceptibility of osteosarcoma. Genet Mol Res. 2015;14(4):14561–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Jiang Y, Liang G, Wang L, Jiang J, Du G, Huang Y. Association between vascular endothelial growth factor +936 C/T gene polymorphism and age-related macular degeneration. J Int Med Res. 2013;41(2):317–24.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim HW, Ko GJ, Kang YS, Lee MH, Song HK, Kim HK, Cha DR. Role of the VEGF 936 C/T polymorphism in diabetic microvascular complications in type 2 diabetic patients. Nephrology (Carlton). 2009;14(7):681–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Wei H, Liu L, Chen Q. Selective removal of mitochondria via mitophagy: distinct pathways for different mitochondrial stresses. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2015;1853(10 Pt B):2784–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Xian W, Zheng H, Wu WJ. Predictive value of vascular endothelial growth factor polymorphisms on the risk of renal cell carcinomas. Genet Mol Res. 2015;14(3):7634–42.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Han X, Liu L, Niu J, Yang J, Zhang Z, Zhang Z. Association between VEGF polymorphisms (936C/T, −460T/C and -634G/C) with haplotypes and coronary heart disease susceptibility. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(1):922–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Li L, Pan Y, Dai L, Liu B, Zhang D. Association of genetic polymorphisms on vascular endothelial growth factor and its receptor genes with susceptibility to coronary heart disease. Med Sci Monit. 2016;22:31–40.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Biselli PM, Guerzoni AR, de Godoy MF, Pavarino-Bertelli EC, Goloni-Bertollo EM. Vascular endothelial growth factor genetic variability and coronary artery disease in Brazilian population. Heart Vessel. 2008;23(6):371–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Petrovic D, Verhovec R, Globocnik Petrovic M, Osredkar J, Peterlin B. Association of vascular endothelial growth factor gene polymorphism with myocardial infarction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Cardiology. 2007;107(4):291–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kangas-Kontio T, Tapanainen JM, Huikuri H, Savolainen ER, Paivansalo M, Kauma H, Kesaniemi YA, Savolainen MJ, Kakko S. Variation in the vascular endothelial growth factor gene, carotid intima-media thickness and the risk of acute myocardial infarction. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2009;69(3):335–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Chen Y, Dawes PT, Packham JC, Mattey DL. Interaction between smoking and polymorphism in the promoter region of the VEGFA gene is associated with ischemic heart disease and myocardial infarction in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2011;38(5):802–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Amoli MM, Amiri P, Alborzi A, Larijani B, Saba S, Tavakkoly-Bazzaz J. VEGF gene mRNA expression in patients with coronary artery disease. Mol Biol Rep. 2012;39(9):8595–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Cui QT, Li Y, Duan CH, Zhang W, Guo XL. Further evidence for the contribution of the vascular endothelial growth factor gene in coronary artery disease susceptibility. Gene. 2013;521(2):217–21.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Gu H, Chen W, Yin J, Chen S, Zhang J, Gong J. Methionine sulfoxide reductase a rs10903323 G/a polymorphism is associated with increased risk of coronary artery disease in a Chinese population. Clin Biochem. 2013;46(16–17):1668–72.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Moradzadegan A, Vaisi-Raygani A, Nikzamir A, Rahimi Z. Angiotensin converting enzyme insertion/deletion (I/D) (rs4646994) and VEGF polymorphism (+405G/C; rs2010963) in type II diabetic patients: association with the risk of coronary artery disease. J Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Syst. 2015;16(3):672–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu D, Song J, Ji X, Liu Z, Cong M, Hu B. Association of genetic polymorphisms on VEGFA and VEGFR2 with risk of coronary heart disease. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(19):e3413.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Douvaras P, Antonatos DG, Kekou K, Patsilinakos S, Chouliaras G, Christou A, Andrikou A, Kanavakis E. Association of VEGF gene polymorphisms with the development of heart failure in patients after myocardial infarction. Cardiology. 2009;114(1):11–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kalayi Nia S, Ziaee S, Boroumand MA, Sotudeh Anvari M, Pourgholi L, Jalali A. The impact of vascular endothelial growth factor +405 C/G polymorphism on long-term outcome and severity of coronary artery disease. J Clin Lab Anal. 2017;31(4)Google Scholar
  34. Coultas L, Chawengsaksophak K, Rossant J. Endothelial cells and VEGF in vascular development. Nature. 2005;438(7070):937–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Grunewald M, Avraham I, Dor Y, Bachar-Lustig E, Itin A, Jung S, Chimenti S, Landsman L, Abramovitch R, Keshet E. VEGF-induced adult neovascularization: recruitment, retention, and role of accessory cells. Cell. 2006;124(1):175–89.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Azambuja AP, Portillo-Sanchez V, Rodrigues MV, Omae SV, Schechtman D, Strauss BE, Costanzi-Strauss E, Krieger JE, Perez-Pomares JM, Xavier-Neto J. Retinoic acid and VEGF delay smooth muscle relative to endothelial differentiation to coordinate inner and outer coronary vessel wall morphogenesis. Circ Res. 2010;107(2):204–16.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Kliche S. Waltenberger J. VEGF receptor signaling and endothelial function. IUBMB Life. 2001;52(1–2):61–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Grosskreutz CL, Anand-Apte B, Duplaa C, Quinn TP, Terman BI, Zetter B, D'Amore PA. Vascular endothelial growth factor-induced migration of vascular smooth muscle cells in vitro. Microvasc Res. 1999;58(2):128–36.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Howell WM, Ali S, Rose-Zerilli MJ, Ye S. VEGF polymorphisms and severity of atherosclerosis. J Med Genet. 2005;42(6):485–90.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Osada-Oka M, Ikeda T, Imaoka S, Akiba S, Sato T. VEGF-enhanced proliferation under hypoxia by an autocrine mechanism in human vascular smooth muscle cells. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2008;15(1):26–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Eaton CB, Gramling R, Parker DR, Roberts MB, Lu B, Ridker PM. Prospective association of vascular endothelial growth factor-a (VEGF-A) with coronary heart disease mortality in southeastern New England. Atherosclerosis. 2008;200(1):221–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Fuchs S, Lavi I, Tzang O, Bessler H, Brosh D, Bental T, Dvir D, Einav S, Kornowski R. Intracoronary monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 and vascular endothelial growth factor levels are associated with necrotic core, calcium and fibrous tissue atherosclerotic plaque components: an intracoronary ultrasound radiofrequency study. Cardiology. 2012;123(2):125–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Lee KW, Lip GY, Blann AD. Plasma angiopoietin-1, angiopoietin-2, angiopoietin receptor tie-2, and vascular endothelial growth factor levels in acute coronary syndromes. Circulation. 2004;110(16):2355–60.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Zygalaki E, Kaklamanis L, Nikolaou NI, Kyrzopoulos S, Houri M, Kyriakides Z, Lianidou ES, Kremastinos DT. Expression profile of total VEGF, VEGF splice variants and VEGF receptors in the myocardium and arterial vasculature of diabetic and non-diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. Clin Biochem. 2008;41(1–2):82–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Watson CJ, Webb NJ, Bottomley MJ, Brenchley PE. Identification of polymorphisms within the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene: correlation with variation in VEGF protein production. Cytokine. 2000;12(8):1232–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Kim B-S, Chen J, Weinstein T, Noiri E, Goligorsky MS. VEGF expression in hypoxia and hyperglycemia: reciprocal effect on branching angiogenesis in epithelial-endothelial co-cultures. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13(8):2027–36.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Mohammadi M, Bazrafshani MR, Day PJ, Ollier WE. Vascular endothelial growth factor production is regulated by gene polymorphisms. Iran J Immunol. 2009;6(3):119–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement