Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19578514›Full record

ArticleBiomarker insights2008

MUC1 as a Putative Prognostic Marker for Prostate Cancer.

Rona J Strawbridge, Monica Nistér, Kerstin Brismar, Henrik Grönberg, Chunde Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker insights, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Research progress of MUC1 in genitourinary cancers.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rona J StrawbridgeDepartments of Oncology-Pathology.
Monica Nistér
Kerstin Brismar
Henrik Grönberg
Chunde Li
Karolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MUC1 is expressed on the apical surface of glandular epithelium. With functions including protection, adhesion and signaling, MUC1 has been implicated in prostate cancer. There are many splice variants, the best characterized of which are MUC1/1 and MUC1/2 which are determined by a SNP (rs4072037, 3506G>A).Blood DNA from the general population, BPH, sporadic and hereditary prostate cancer subjects were genotyped for the rs4072037 SNP. G allele frequencies were significantly reduced in hereditary prostate cancer (15%) compared to population, BPH or sporadic prostate cancer samples (27%, 39% and 26% respectively). In addition, the G allele was lost from 3 of 8 heterozygous sporadic prostate tumor samples compared to matched blood DNA. Bioinformatics analysis of MUC1 protein sequences provides insight into differences between the variants which may be functionally relevant. The literature indicates discrepancies between immuno-histochemical studies, possibly due to the variety of MUC1 epitopes targeting diverse regions of the molecule. The contradictory findings in cell lines highlight the problem associated with inadequate experimental systems.This is the first report of genetic differences in MUC1 between blood and prostatic cancer tissue. This finding is important as proof of principle, given that many association studies focus on blood DNA rather than on the tumor DNA. As yet, potential functional differences between splice variants has been paid little attention. Antibodies which discriminate between the variants and standardization of methods would help to clarify whether there is a role for MUC1 as a prognostic marker.

Identifiers

PMID19578514
PMCPMC2688377
OpenAlexW1746834209

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.