SynthesisMolecular biology reports2011
Association of a LSP1 gene rs3817198T>C polymorphism with breast cancer risk: evidence from 33,920 cases and 35,671 controls.
Synthesis in Molecular biology reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- The LSP1 rs3817198 T > C polymorphism contributes to increased breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis of twelve studies.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- Ethnic background and genetic variation in the evaluation of cancer risk: a systematic review.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Comparative study and meta-analysis of meta-analysis studies for the correlation of genomic markers with early cancer detection.Human genomics · 2013Pooled it
- Common BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in breast cancer families: a meta-analysis from systematic review.Molecular biology reports · 2012Pooled it
- Correlation betweenReports of biochemistry & molecular biology · 2020Article
- "Stealth dissemination" of macrophage-tumor cell fusions cultured from blood of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.PloS one · 2017Article
- Associations between breast density and a panel of single nucleotide polymorphisms linked to breast cancer risk: a cohort study with digital mammography.BMC cancer · 2015Article
- Correlation between LSP1 polymorphisms and the susceptibility to breast cancer.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
- Common breast cancer risk variants in the post-COGS era: a comprehensive review.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2013Review
- Article
- Extracting coordinated patterns of DNA methylation and gene expression in ovarian cancer.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Published data on the association between lymphocyte-specific protein 1 (LSP1) rs3817198T>C polymorphism and breast cancer risk are inconclusive. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis of the LSP1 gene and risk of breast cancer to obtain the most reliable estimate of the association. PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched. Crude odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled to assess the strength of the association between the LSP1 rs3817198T>C polymorphism and risk of breast cancer. A total of seven eligible studies including 33,920 cases and 35,671 controls based on the search criteria were involved in this meta-analysis. The distributions of genotypes in the controls were all in agreement with Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. We observed that the LSP1 rs3817198T>C polymorphism was significantly correlated with breast cancer risk when all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis (the allele contrast model: OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.04-1.08; the homozygote codominant: OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01-1.28). In the stratified analysis by ethnicity, significant association was observed in Caucasians for CC versus TT homozygote codominant model (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.03-1.52) and for the recessive model (OR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.02-1.47). There was significant association observed in Africans for CC versus TT homozygote codominant model (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.22-0.92) and for the recessive model (OR = 0.43; 95% CI=0.22-0.88). Also, significant association was observed in mixed ethnicities for CC versus TT homozygote codominant model (OR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.05-1.19). When stratified by study design, statistically significantly elevated risk was found in nested case-control studies (CC vs. TT: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.05-1.19). But no significant association was observed for all comparison models between LSP1 rs3817198T>C polymorphism and breast cancer risk in hospital-based and people-based studies. When stratified by BRCA1 mutation carriers status, statistically significantly elevated risk was found in this meta-analysis (the allele contrast model: OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.01-1.14; the dominant model: OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00-1.18). And significant association was found in the BRCA2 mutation carriers in the allele contrast (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.03-1.20), the homozygote codominant (OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.04-1.47), the heterozygote codominant (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.00-1.25) and the dominant models (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.03-1.27). There was significant association between LSP1 rs3817198T>C polymorphism and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 positive cohort in all comparison models (the allele contrast model: OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03-1.13; CC vs. TT: OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.05-1.29; TC vs. TT: OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.01-1.16; the dominant model: OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.03-1.17; the recessive model: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.01-1.23). In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that the LSP1 rs3817198T>C polymorphism is a low-penetrant risk factor for developing breast cancer but may not be in Africans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.