Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22350582›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2012

Invited commentary: more surprises from a gene desert.

Sholom Wacholder, Meredith Yeager, Linda M Liao

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sholom WacholderNational Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. wacholds@mail.nih.gov
Meredith Yeager
Linda M Liao
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Methods for Epidemiology StudiesZIACP010181 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI ALBERT, PAUL · 2009 to 2025
$34.8M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pleiotropy across the 8q24 region is perhaps the most intriguing of the genome-wide association findings relating to cancer. This region of chromosome 8 is a gene desert, far from any recognized genes. Guarrera et al., whose work is reported in this issue (Am J Epidemiol. 2012;175(6):479-487), took an epidemiologic approach to learn more about the 8q24 region. They capitalized on their ascertainment of other endpoints in members of the cohort at the Turin site of the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition to investigate multiple outcomes for additional pleiotropic effects in the 8q24 region. Alternative design options might involve genotyping of more variants, incorporation of more cases, or use of a single control group close to the size of the most common case group. Their analytic methods reflect the uncertainty of the underlying biology. The findings sharpen the scientific question about how variation in the 8q24 region affects pathogenesis. The genome-wide association effort is possible because of the economy of scale afforded by extremely dense genotyping. Strict adherence to the hypothesis-driven approach would ignore information that is obtainable at a trivial cost. The genome-wide association strategy tests whether agnostic data-mining methods can advance knowledge alongside or even in place of the standard hypothesis-driven approach, which is the conventional scientific method children learn in kindergarten and onward, even through graduate school and beyond.

Indexed as

Genetic PleiotropyHaplotypesPolymorphism, Single NucleotideCardiovascular DiseasesChromosomes, Human, Pair 8Diabetes MellitusFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID22350582
PMCPMC3299420
OpenAlexW2144734737

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.