Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17504528›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2007

BRIP1 (BACH1) variants and familial breast cancer risk: a case-control study.

Bernd Frank, Kari Hemminki, Alfons Meindl, Barbara Wappenschmidt, Christian Sutter, Marion Kiechle, Peter Bugert, Rita K Schmutzler, Claus R Bartram, Barbara Burwinkel

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Endocrine connections · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Bernd FrankHelmholtz-University Group Molecular Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. b.frank@dkfz.de
Kari Hemminki
Alfons Meindl
Barbara Wappenschmidt
Christian Sutter
Marion Kiechle
Peter Bugert
Rita K Schmutzler
Claus R Bartram
Barbara Burwinkel
Heidelberg University · DEKlinikum rechts der Isar · DEKarolinska Institutet · SEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DEUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInactivating and truncating mutations of the nuclear BRCA1-interacting protein 1 (BRIP1) have been shown to be the major cause of Fanconi anaemia and, due to subsequent alterations of BRCA1 function, predispose to breast cancer (BC).

methodsWe investigated the effect of BRIP1 -64G>A and Pro919Ser on familial BC risk by means of TaqMan allelic discrimination, analysing BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation-negative index patients of 571 German BC families and 712 control individuals.

resultsNo significant differences in genotype frequencies between BC cases and controls for BRIP1 -64G>A and Pro919Ser were observed.

conclusionWe found no effect of the putatively functional BRIP1 variants -64G>A and Pro919Ser on the risk of familial BC.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesDNA-Binding ProteinsFanconi AnemiaFanconi Anemia Complementation Group ProteinsGenetic VariationGenotypeHumansMiddle AgedMutationRisk FactorsRNA HelicasesBRIP1 protein, humanDNA-Binding ProteinsFanconi Anemia Complementation Group ProteinsRNA Helicases

Identifiers

PMID17504528
PMCPMC1887536
OpenAlexW2026322580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.