Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20034393›Full record

ArticleGenome medicine2009

Postmenopausal estrogen and progestin effects on the serum proteome.

Sharon J Pitteri, Samir M Hanash, Aaron Aragaki, Lynn M Amon, Lin Chen, Tina Busald Buson, Sophie Paczesny, Hiroyuki Katayama, Hong Wang, Melissa M Johnson and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Multimerin-1 and cancer: a review.Bioscience reports · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Serum metabolomic profiles associated with postmenopausal hormone use.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

21 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Sharon J PitteriPublic Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N, Seattle, WA 98109, USA.
Samir M Hanash
Aaron Aragaki
Lynn M Amon
Lin Chen
Tina Busald Buson
Sophie Paczesny
Hiroyuki Katayama
Hong Wang
Melissa M Johnson
Qing Zhang
Martin McIntosh
Pei Wang
Charles Kooperberg
Jacques E Rossouw
Rebecca D Jackson
Joann E Manson
Judith Hsia
Simin Liu
Lisa Martin
Ross L Prentice
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USAstraZeneca (United States) · USEisai (Japan) · JPGeorge Washington University · USHarvard University · USMichigan Center for Translational Pathology · USNational Institutes of Health · USThe Ohio State University · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen's Health Initiative randomized trials of postmenopausal hormone therapy reported intervention effects on several clinical outcomes, with some important differences between estrogen alone and estrogen plus progestin. The biologic mechanisms underlying these effects, and these differences, have yet to be fully elucidated.

methodsBaseline serum samples were compared with samples drawn 1 year later for 50 women assigned to active hormone therapy in both the estrogen-plus-progestin and estrogen-alone randomized trials, by applying an in-depth proteomic discovery platform to serum pools from 10 women per pool.

resultsIn total, 378 proteins were quantified in two or more of the 10 pooled serum comparisons, by using strict identification criteria. Of these, 169 (44.7%) showed evidence (nominal P < 0.05) of change in concentration between baseline and 1 year for one or both of estrogen-plus-progestin and estrogen-alone groups. Quantitative changes were highly correlated between the two hormone-therapy preparations. A total of 98 proteins had false discovery rates < 0.05 for change with estrogen plus progestin, compared with 94 for estrogen alone. Of these, 84 had false discovery rates <0.05 for both preparations. The observed changes included multiple proteins relevant to coagulation, inflammation, immune response, metabolism, cell adhesion, growth factors, and osteogenesis. Evidence of differential changes also was noted between the hormone preparations, with the strongest evidence in growth factor and inflammation pathways.

conclusionsSerum proteomic analyses yielded a large number of proteins similarly affected by estrogen plus progestin and by estrogen alone and identified some proteins and pathways that appear to be differentially affected between the two hormone preparations; this may explain their distinct clinical effects.

Identifiers

PMID20034393
PMCPMC2808737
OpenAlexW2162295944

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.