SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2011
Lack of association between BARD1 Cys557Ser variant and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 11,870 cases and 7,687 controls.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Literature Review ofGenes · 2020Review
- Dualistic Role of BARD1 in Cancer.Genes · 2017Review
- BARD1 Gene Polymorphisms Confer Nephroblastoma Susceptibility.EBioMedicine · 2017Article
- The Association between GWAS-identified BARD1 Gene SNPs and Neuroblastoma Susceptibility in a Southern Chinese Population.International journal of medical sciences · 2016Article
- Functional Analysis of BARD1 Missense Variants in Homology-Directed Repair of DNA Double Strand Breaks.Human mutation · 2015Article
- Analysis of large mutations in BARD1 in patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer: the Polish population as an example.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Curative Effects of Fuzheng Huayu on Liver Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe BRCA1-associated RING domain (BARD1) gene has been identified as a high-penetrance gene for breast cancer, whose germline and somatic mutations were reported in both non-BRCA1/2 hereditary site-specific and sporadic breast cancer cases. Some association studies suggested that the BRAD1 Cys557Ser variant might be associated with increased risk of breast cancer, but the results remain conflicting rather than conclusive. In order to derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, this meta-analysis was performed.
methodsEligible studies were identified by searching several databases for relevant reports published before March 2011. In total, 14 studies (11,870 cases and 7,687 controls) were included in the present meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for breast cancer risk associated with Cys557Ser carrier was estimated.
resultsThe carrier frequency of the Cys557Ser mutation was 3.85% (457/11,870) in patients with breast cancer and 3.29% (253/7,687) in healthy controls. When all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis, there was no evidence for significant association between Cys557Ser mutation and breast cancer risk (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.94-1.34). In the subgroup analyses by design of experiment and family history with BRCA1/2 status (unselected cases, family history with non-BRCA1/2 cases, and family history with BRCA1/2-positive cases), no significant associations were found in any subgroup of population.
conclusionsThis meta-analysis strongly suggests that BARD1 Cys557Ser mutation is not associated with increased breast cancer risk.
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.