SynthesisHuman genomics2013
Comparative study and meta-analysis of meta-analysis studies for the correlation of genomic markers with early cancer detection.
Synthesis in Human genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- No association between the Ser9Gly polymorphism of the dopamine receptor D3 gene and schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of family-based association studies.BMC medical genetics · 2020Pooled it
- Upregulation of SOX11 enhances tamoxifen resistance and promotes epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition via slug in MCF-7 breast cancer cells.Journal of cellular physiology · 2020Article
- Article
- A meta-analysis of data associatingNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2018Article
- Identification of a gene expression profile associated with the regulation of angiogenesis in endometrial cancer.Molecular medicine reports · 2017Article
- Nutrigenomics 2.0: The Need for Ongoing and Independent Evaluation and Synthesis of Commercial Nutrigenomics Tests' Scientific Knowledge Base for Responsible Innovation.Omics : a journal of integrative biology · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A large number of common disorders, including cancer, have complex genetic traits, with multiple genetic and environmental components contributing to susceptibility. A literature search revealed that even among several meta-analyses, there were ambiguous results and conclusions. In the current study, we conducted a thorough meta-analysis gathering the published meta-analysis studies previously reported to correlate any random effect or predictive value of genome variations in certain genes for various types of cancer. The overall analysis was initially aimed to result in associations (1) among genes which when mutated lead to different types of cancer (e.g. common metabolic pathways) and (2) between groups of genes and types of cancer. We have meta-analysed 150 meta-analysis articles which included 4,474 studies, 2,452,510 cases and 3,091,626 controls (5,544,136 individuals in total) including various racial groups and other population groups (native Americans, Latinos, Aborigines, etc.). Our results were not only consistent with previously published literature but also depicted novel correlations of genes with new cancer types. Our analysis revealed a total of 17 gene-disease pairs that are affected and generated gene/disease clusters, many of which proved to be independent of the criteria used, which suggests that these clusters are biologically meaningful.
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.