SynthesisTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2014
Association between vitamin D receptor poly(A) polymorphism and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Commentary: Vitamin D and Pancreatic Cancer: A Pooled Analysis from the Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium.Frontiers in oncology · 2015Article
- An integrated approach to defining genetic and environmental determinants for major clinical outcomes involving vitamin D.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin D receptor (VDR) poly(A) is a common genetic polymorphism in the VDR gene, and it has been implicated to be associated with breast cancer risk. However, previous studies on the association reported inconclusive results. We performed this meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the association. Eligible studies were searched in PubMed and EMBASE databases. Odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used for statistical analysis. A total 6,631 cases and 6,718 controls from 11 case-control studies were finally included into the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of total eligible studies showed that VDR poly(A) polymorphism was not associated with the risk of breast cancer (S versus L: OR = 0.99, 95% CI of 0.90-1.09, P = 0.84; SS versus LL: OR = 0.96, 95% CI of 0.79-1.18, P = 0.70; SS/LS versus LL: OR = 0.96, 95% CI of 0.83-1.12, P = 0.63; SS versus LL/LS: OR = 1.00, 95% CI of 0.91-1.10, P = 0.98). Meta-analysis of studies with high quality also showed that there was no association between VDR poly(A) polymorphism and breast cancer risk. In addition, in the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, no significant association was found among Caucasians. Therefore, the meta-analysis suggests that VDR poly(A) polymorphism is not associated with the risk of breast cancer. Large well-designed studies are necessary to clarify the possible association in Asians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24037913What 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.