SynthesisMolecular biology reports2012
Association of hOGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism with gastric cancer risk: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Molecular biology reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Lack of any Association between the Hogg1 Ser326Cys Polymorphism and Breast Cancer Risk: a Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis Of 18 StudiesAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies investigating the association between human 8-oxoguanine glycosylase 1(hOGG1) Ser326Cys polymorphism and gastric cancer (GC) risk have reported conflicting results. We performed a meta-analysis of published case-control studies to better compare results between studies. 11 eligible studies with 2,180 GC cases and 3,985 controls were selected. There were 5 studies involving Caucasians and 5 studies involving Asians. The combined result based on all studies did not show significant difference in any genetics models. Ser/Cys + Cys/Cys versus Ser/Ser (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.81-1.03), Cys/Cys versus Ser/Cys + Ser/Ser (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.80-1.44), Ser/Cys versus Ser/Ser (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.80-1.03), Sys/Cys versus Ser/Cys (OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.83-1.47), Cys/Cys versus Ser/Ser (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.74-1.34), Cys versus Ser (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.88-1.17).When stratifying for ethnicity, there was still no significant association found between hOGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism and GC risk. Funnel plot and Egger’s test showed some evidence of publication bias on the basis of all studies. Two studies were the main reason because their samples were too small. However, the result of sensitivity analysis suggested that the influence of these two studies and one mixed population study on the pooled OR was weak. Our result could explain the association between hOGG1 Ser326Cys polymorphism and GC risk. In conclusion, we did not found the evidence that the Cys allele at codon 326 of hOGG1 could increase GC risk in our analysis.
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.