Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17213870›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2007

Pharmacogenomics and nutrigenomics: synergies and differences.

D Ghosh, M A Skinner, W A Laing

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors.

D GhoshThe Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand. dghosh@hortresearch.co.nz
M A Skinner
W A Laing

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The success of the Human Genome Project and the spectacular development of broad genomics tools have catalyzed a new era in both medicine and nutrition. The terms pharmacogenomics and nutrigenomics are relatively new. Both have grown out of their genetic forbears as large-scale genomics technologies have been developed in the last decade. The aim of both disciplines is to individualize or personalize medicine and food and nutrition, and ultimately health, by tailoring the drug or the food to the individual genotype. This review article provides an overview of synergies and differences between these two potentially powerful science areas. Individual genetic variation is the common factor on which both pharmacogenomics and nutrigenomics are based. Each human is genetically (including epigenetics) unique and phenotypically distinct. One of the expectations of both technologies is that a wide range of gene variants and related single-nucleotide polymorphism will be identified as to their importance in health status, validated and incorporated into genotype based strategies for the optimization of health and the prevention of disease. Pharmacogenomics requires rigorous genomic testing that will be regulated and analyzed by professionals and acted on by medical practitioners. As further information is obtained on the importance of the interaction of food and the human genotype in disease prevention and health, pharmacogenomics can provide an opportunity driver for nutrigenomics. As we move from disease treatment to disease prevention, the two disciplines will become more closely aligned.

Indexed as

Food, OrganicGenetic VariationGenome, HumanGenomicsGene Expression RegulationGenotypeHealth StatusHumansNutritional Physiological PhenomenaPolymorphism, GeneticPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

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.