Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21678065›Full record

ReviewHuman genetics2011

Current status of genome-wide association studies in cancer.

Charles C Chung, Stephen J Chanock

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Human genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
18.2field-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

94 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. A comprehensive review of genomic perspectives of canine diseases as a model to study human disorders.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Charles C ChungLaboratory of Translational Genomics, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-4608, USA.
Stephen J Chanock
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Laboratory of Translational GenomicsZIACP010201 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI PROKUNINA-OLSSON, LIUDMILA · 2010 to 2025
$91.2M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies in cancer have already identified over 150 regions associated with two dozen specific cancers. Already, a handful of multi-cancer susceptibility regions have been uncovered, providing new insights into perhaps common mechanisms of carcinogenesis. For each new susceptibility allele, investigators now face the arduous task of interrogating each region beginning with fine mapping prior to pursuing the biological basis for the direct association of one or more variants. It appears that there may be a significant number of common alleles that contribute to the heritability of a specific cancer. Since each region confers a small contribution to the risk for cancer, it is daunting to consider any single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) as a clinical test. Since the complex genomic architecture of each cancer differs, additional genotyping and sequence analysis will be required to comprehensively catalog susceptibility alleles followed by the formidable task of understanding the interactions between genetic regions as well as the environment. It will be critical to assess the applicability of genetic tests in specific clinical settings, such as when to perform screening tests with calculable risks (e.g., biopsies or chemoprevention), before incorporating SNPs into clinical practice. To advance the current genomic observations to the clinical venue, new studies will need to be designed to validate the utility of known genetic variants in assessing risk for cancer as well as its outcomes.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyGenetic MarkersGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansNeoplasmsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID21678065
OpenAlexW2157669394

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.