From:  Variants in immune-related genes and their association with breast cancer risk and clinical behavior: an integrative review

 Evidence summary for repeatedly investigated variants by outcome category, genetic model, and population.

GeneGenetic variantReferencePopulationOutcomeGenetic modelEffect size
(OR, 95% CI)
Direction
TGFB1rs1800470[27]North IndianSusceptibilityDominant
TT + TC vs. CC
1.7 (1.1–2.6)↑ Risk
[15]1BrazilianSusceptibilityHaplotypeNot extractable
[16]BrazilianSusceptibilityRecessive
TT vs. CT + CC
0.39 (0.1–0.8)↓ Risk
[34]2IndianSusceptibilityDominant TC + CC vs. TT0.50 (0.2–0.9)↓ Risk
rs1800469[15]1BrazilianSusceptibilityHaplotypeNot extractable
[16]BrazilianSusceptibilityDominant
CT + TT vs. CC
2.1 (1.1–3.8)↑ Risk
rs1800471[15]1BrazilianSusceptibilityHaplotypeNot extractable
[16]BrazilianSusceptibilityRecessive
CC vs. GG + GC
11.3 (1.6–78.2)↑ Risk
IL6rs1800795[20]South IndianSusceptibilityDominant
GC + CC vs. GG
2.1 (1.5–2.9)↑ Risk
[5]Multiethnic*SusceptibilityDominant GC + CC vs. GG0.8 (0.8–0.9)↓ Risk
[19]Caucasian AmericansSusceptibilityLog-additive
per C allele
1.0 (0.9–1.2)No effect
rs1800797[20]South IndianSusceptibilityDominant GC + CC vs. GG2.11 (1.5–2.9)↑ Risk
[5]Multiethnic*SusceptibilityDominant GT + TT vs. GG0.8 (0.7–0.9)↓ Risk
IL1Brs1143627[5]Multiethnic*SusceptibilityDominant TC + CC vs. TT0.9
(0.8–0.9)
↓ Risk
[24]TurkishSusceptibilityCodominant/homozygote comparison
TT vs. CC
2.06 (1.1–3.6)↑ Risk
IL10rs1800871[32]EgyptianSusceptibilityDominant
TC + CC vs. TT
4.02 (1.4–10.9)↑ Risk
[5]Multiethnic*SusceptibilityRecessive
TT vs. CC + CT
0.79 (0.6–0.9)↓ Risk
CXCL12rs1801157[9]ChineseSusceptibilityDominant
GA + AA vs. GG
1.35 (1.0–1.7)↑ Risk
[13]BrazilianGene expressionDominant
GA vs. GG
Not applicable↓ CXCL12 expression
B7H4rs10754339[33]TurkishSusceptibilityCodominant
AG + GG vs. AA
Not reportedNo effect
[12]ChineseSusceptibility1-locus model31.67 (1.2–2.2)↑ Risk

1: Ref. [15] focused on TGFBR2 and TGFB1 haplotypes and did not report extractable OR (95% CI) for the individual variants listed in this table; 2: this study reports multiple genetic models; the value shown here corresponds to the dominant model in Maharashtrian women aged < 40 years and is age-adjusted; 3: high-risk genotype combination vs. low-risk genotype combination; *: non-Hispanic White and Hispanic/Native American; ↑: increased; ↓: decreased. OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.