Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19906782›Full record

ArticleCarcinogenesis2010

Genome-wide association studies in cancer--current and future directions.

Charles C Chung, Wagner C S Magalhaes, Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet, Stephen J Chanock

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Carcinogenesis, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Statistical genomics in rare cancer.Seminars in cancer biology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. PLCE1 rs2274223 A>G polymorphism and cancer risk: a meta-analysis.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2013
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. CARLo-7-A plausible biomarker for bladder cancer.International journal of experimental pathology · 2019
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Impact ofOncotarget · 2018
    Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Charles C ChungLaboratory of Translational Genomics, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD 20892-4608, USA.
Wagner C S Magalhaes
Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet
Stephen J Chanock
National Institutes of Health · USUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have emerged as an important tool for discovering regions of the genome that harbor genetic variants that confer risk for different types of cancers. The success of GWAS in the last 3 years is due to the convergence of new technologies that can genotype hundreds of thousands of single-nucleotide polymorphism markers together with comprehensive annotation of genetic variation. This approach has provided the opportunity to scan across the genome in a sufficiently large set of cases and controls without a set of prior hypotheses in search of susceptibility alleles with low effect sizes. Generally, the susceptibility alleles discovered thus far are common, namely, with a frequency in one or more population of >10% and each allele confers a small contribution to the overall risk for the disease. For nearly all regions conclusively identified by GWAS, the per allele effect sizes estimated are <1.3. Consequently, the findings of GWAS underscore the complex nature of cancer and have focused attention on a subset of the genetic variants that comprise the genomic architecture of each type of cancer, which already can differ substantially by the number of regions associated with specific types of cancer. For instance, in prostate cancer, there could be >30 distinct regions harboring common susceptibility alleles identified by GWAS, whereas in lung cancer, a disease strongly driven by exposure to tobacco products, so far, only three regions have been conclusively established. To date, >85 regions have been conclusively associated in over a dozen different cancers, yet no more than five regions have been associated with more than one distinct cancer type. GWAS are an important discovery tool that require extensive follow-up to map each region, investigate the biological mechanism underpinning the association and eventually test the optimal markers for assessing risk for a disease or its outcome, such as in pharmacogenomics, the study of the effect of genetic variation on pharmacological interventions. The success of GWAS has opened new horizons for exploration and highlighted the complex genomic architecture of disease susceptibility.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyHumansNeoplasmsPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID19906782
PMCPMC2860704
OpenAlexW2150003982

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.