Additional file 1 of Association between the MCP-1 -2518 A > G (rs1024611) polymorphism and susceptibility to type 2 diabetes mellitus and diabetic nephropathy: a meta-analysis

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Forest plot of T2DM risk with the dominant model (GG+GA vs. AA) (T2DM vs. healthy control) of the MCP-1 rs1024611 polymorphism. (A) for the overall populations and (B) genotyping method; (C) age- and sex- adjusted; (D) and comorbid chronic disease subgroups. Figure S2. Forest plot of DN risk with the dominant model (GG+GA vs. AA) (DN vs. healthy control) of the MCP-1 rs1024611 polymorphism. (A) for the overall populations and (B) genotyping method; (C) age- and sex- adjusted; (D) and comorbid chronic disease subgroups. Figure S3. Forest plot of DN risk with the dominant model (GG+GA vs. AA) (DN vs. T2DM) of the MCP-1 rs1024611 polymorphism. (A) for the overall populations and (B) genotyping method; (C) age- and sex- adjusted; (D) and comorbid chronic disease subgroups. Figure S4. Sensitivity analysis via deletion of each individual study (T2DM vs. healthy control). (A) for GG+GA vs. AA and (B) GG vs.GA + AA; (C) GG vs. AA; (D) GG vs. GA; (E) and G vs. A models. Figure S5. Sensitivity analysis via deletion of each individual study (DN vs. healthy control). (A) for GG+GA vs. AA and (B) GG vs.GA + AA; (C) GG vs. AA; (D) GG vs. GA; (E) and G vs. A models. Figure S6. Sensitivity analysis via deletion of each individual study (DN vs. T2DM). (A) for GG+GA vs. AA and (B) GG vs.GA + AA; (C) GG vs. AA; (D) GG vs. GA; (E) and G vs. A models. Table S1. The comprehensive search strategies for different databases. Table S2. Main characteristic of included observational studies evaluating the relationship between the MCP-1 rs1024611 polymorphism and DN/T2DM risk. Table S3. Meta-analysis of the association between the MCP-1 rs1024611polymorphism and T2DM risk (T2DM vs. healthy control). Table S4. Meta-analysis of the association between the MCP-1 rs1024611polymorphism and DN risk (DN vs. healthy control). Table S5. Meta-analysis of the association between the MCP-1 rs1024611polymorphism and DN risk (DN vs. T2DM).

补充材料1：图S1。单核细胞趋化蛋白1（MCP-1）基因rs1024611多态性显性遗传模型（GG+GA vs. AA）下2型糖尿病（T2DM）与健康对照组的发病风险森林图，其中(A)为总体人群亚组，(B)为基因分型方法亚组，(C)为校正年龄与性别亚组，(D)为合并慢性疾病亚组。补充材料1：图S2。MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性显性遗传模型（GG+GA vs. AA）下糖尿病肾病（DN）与健康对照组的发病风险森林图，其中(A)为总体人群亚组，(B)为基因分型方法亚组，(C)为校正年龄与性别亚组，(D)为合并慢性疾病亚组。补充材料1：图S3。MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性显性遗传模型（GG+GA vs. AA）下DN组与T2DM组的发病风险森林图，其中(A)为总体人群亚组，(B)为基因分型方法亚组，(C)为校正年龄与性别亚组，(D)为合并慢性疾病亚组。补充材料1：图S4。逐一剔除单项研究后开展的敏感性分析（sensitivity analysis）（T2DM组与健康对照组），其中(A)对应GG+GA vs. AA模型，(B)对应GG vs. GA+AA模型，(C)对应GG vs. AA模型，(D)对应GG vs. GA模型，(E)对应G vs. A模型。补充材料1：图S5。逐一剔除单项研究后开展的敏感性分析（sensitivity analysis）（DN组与健康对照组），其中(A)对应GG+GA vs. AA模型，(B)对应GG vs. GA+AA模型，(C)对应GG vs. AA模型，(D)对应GG vs. GA模型，(E)对应G vs. A模型。补充材料1：图S6。逐一剔除单项研究后开展的敏感性分析（sensitivity analysis）（DN组与T2DM组），其中(A)对应GG+GA vs. AA模型，(B)对应GG vs. GA+AA模型，(C)对应GG vs. AA模型，(D)对应GG vs. GA模型，(E)对应G vs. A模型。补充表S1。不同数据库的综合检索策略。补充表S2。纳入的评估MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性与糖尿病肾病（DN）、2型糖尿病（T2DM）发病风险相关性的观察性研究的主要特征。补充表S3。MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性与T2DM发病风险相关性的Meta分析（Meta-analysis）（T2DM组与健康对照组）。补充表S4。MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性与DN发病风险相关性的Meta分析（Meta-analysis）（DN组与健康对照组）。补充表S5。MCP-1基因rs1024611多态性与DN发病风险相关性的Meta分析（Meta-analysis）（DN组与T2DM组）。