Genetic and other epidemiological risk factors of infants and children with hypospadias: a case control study

African Journal of Urology

Table 3 Comparison between the two studied groups according to model genotyping

	Cases (n = 50)		Control^® (n = 50)		χ²	p
	No	%	No	%	χ²	p
V89L
Dominant
VV^®	22	44.0	50	100.0	38.889*	< 0.001*
VL + LL	28	56.0	0	0.0	38.889*	< 0.001*
Recessive
VV + VL^®	47	94.0	50	100.0	3.093	^FEp = 0.242
LL	3	6.0	0	0.0	3.093	^FEp = 0.242
Co–dominant − 1
VV^®	22	46.8	50	100.0	35.830*	< 0.001*
VL	25	53.2	0	0.0	35.830*	< 0.001*
Co–dominant − 2
VV^®	22	44.0	50	100.0	6.250*	^FEp = 0.034*
LL	3	6.0	0	0.0	6.250*	^FEp = 0.034*
Over–dominant
VL^®	25	50.0	0	0.0	33.333	< 0.001*
VV + LL	25	50.0	50	100.0	33.333	< 0.001*
G34R
Dominant
GG^®	29	58.0	40	80.0	5.657*	0.017*
GR + RR	21	42.0	10	20.0	5.657*	0.017*
Recessive
GG + GR^®	49	98.0	50	100.0	1.010	^FEp = 1.000
RR	1	2.0	0	0.0	1.010	^FEp = 1.000
Co–dominant − 1
GG^®	29	58.0	40	80.0	5.077*	0.024*
GR	20	40.0	10	20.0	5.077*	0.024*
Co–dominant − 2
GG^®	29	58.0	40	80.0	1.353	^FEp = 0.429
RR	1	2.0	0	0.0	1.353	^FEp = 0.429
Over–dominant
GR^®	20	40.0	10	20.0	4.762*	0.029*
GG + RR	30	60.0	40	80.0	4.762*	0.029*

χ²: Chi-square test, FE: Fisher Exact, p: p value for comparing between the two studied groups
*Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05