Table 3 Differences in the distribution of cagA and vacA genotypes among different races residing within the same country
| Â | Â | Â | Â | cagAgenotype | vacAgenotype | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Area/Race (n) | Patient (n) | cagA(n/%) | Western EPIYA-ABC | East-Asian EPIYA-ABD | s1 (n/%) | s1a (n/%) | s1b (n/%) | s1c (n/%) | s2 (n/%) | m1 (n/%) | m2 (n/%) | s1m1 (n/%) | s1m2 (n/%) | s2m1 (n/%) | s2m2 (n/%) | i1 (n/%) | i2 (n/%) |
Vietnam | Hanoi (North) | 107 | 103 (96) | 1 (2) | 51 (98) | 107 (100) | NA | NA | NA | 1 (1) | 60* (58) | 44 (42) | 60* (58) | 44 (42) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 50 (94) | 3 (6) |
| Â | Ho Chi Minh (South) | 118 | 90 (94) | 3 (7) | 43 (93) | 96 (100) | NA | NA | NA | 0 (0) | 32 (34) | 62 (66) | 32 (34) | 62 (66) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 44 (94) | 3 (6) |
Thailand | Thai | 38 | 38 (100) | 31# (82) | 7 (18) | 38 (100) | 31 (82) | 0 (0) | 7# (18) | 0 (0) | 35# (92) | 3 (8) | 35 (92) | 3 (8) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | NA | NA |
| Â | Thai-Chinese | 40 | 40 (100) | 16 (42) | 24 (60) | 40 (100) | 17 (43) | 0 (0) | 23 (58) | 0 (0) | 28 (70) | 12 (30) | 28 (70) | 12 (30) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | NA | NA |
| Â | Chinese | 20 | 20 (100) | 3 (15) | 17 (85) | 20 (100) | 5 (25) | 0 (0) | 15 (75) | 0 (0) | 8 (40) | 12 (60) | 8 (40) | 12 (60) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | NA | NA |
Malaysia | Chinese | 286 | 141 (95) | 29** (13) | 186 (87) | 149 (100) | NA | NA | NA | 0 (0) | 82 (55) | 67 (45) | 82 (55) | 67 (45) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 90 (100) | 0 (0) |
| Â | Indian | 144 | 82 (94) | 93 (89) | 11 (11) | 78 (90) | 27 (82) | 4 (12) | 2 (6) | 9 (10) | 61 (70) | 26 (30) | 61 (70) | 17 (20) | 0 (0) | 9 (10) | 44 (90) | 5 (10) |
| Â | Malay | 75 | 43 (86) | 25 (56) | 19 (43) | 45 (90) | 23 (92) | 0 (0) | 2 (8) | 5 (10) | 32 (64) | 18 (36) | 32 (64) | 13 (26) | 0 (0) | 5 (10) | 22 (100) | 0 (0) |