Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16154258›Full record

ReviewCancer letters2006

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-DNA adduct formation in prostate carcinogenesis.

Benjamin A Rybicki, Nora L Nock, Adnan T Savera, Deliang Tang, Andrew Rundle

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer letters, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Heliyon · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Dietary Carcinogens and DNA Adducts in Prostate Cancer.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: from metabolism to lung cancer.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2015
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin A RybickiDepartment of Biostatistics and Research Epidemiology, Henry Ford Health System, 1 Ford Place 3E, Detroit, MI 48202, USA. brybick1@hfhs.org
Nora L Nock
Adnan T Savera
Deliang Tang
Andrew Rundle
Columbia University · USHenry Ford Health System · USCase Western Reserve University · US

Funding

GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION IN PROSTATE CANCERR01ES011126 · NIEHS · HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM · PI RYBICKI, BENJAMIN A. · 2000 to 2017
$8.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES 011126NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES011126NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES 011126-S1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evidence for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) playing a role in prostate carcinogenesis comes mainly from associations between reported PAH exposures and prostate cancer in epidemiologic studies. Associations between prostate cancer and DNA repair genotypes and phenotypes have also been reported, lending further credence to a PAH-induced carcinogenesis pathway in prostate cancer. Recent work that demonstrates the human prostate has metabolic enzyme activity necessary for PAH activation and will form DNA adducts upon exposure to PAH further supports PAH carcinogenesis. We have demonstrated the presence of PAH-DNA adducts in prostate cancer cases, but further validation of this biomarker as a carcinogenic agent in human prostate is needed.

Indexed as

DNA AdductsDNA DamageDNA RepairEnvironmental ExposureHumansMalePolycyclic CompoundsProstatic NeoplasmsDNA AdductsPolycyclic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID16154258
PMCPMC1761147
OpenAlexW2024880844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.