SynthesisTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2014
Associations between Fas/FasL polymorphisms and susceptibility to cervical cancer: 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cervical Carcinogenesis and Immune Response Gene Polymorphisms: A Review.Journal of immunology research · 2017Review
- Genetic susceptibility to cervical cancer: role of common polymorphisms in apoptosis-related genes.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2015Review
- Promoter polymorphism of FASL confers protection against female-specific cancers and those of FAS impact the cancers divergently.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2015Article
- Letter regarding Wang GQ et al. entitled "associations between Fas/FasL polymorphisms and susceptibility to cervical cancer: a meta-analysis".Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic polymorphisms in the Fas/Fas ligand (FasL) gene were proposed to be associated with susceptibility to cervical cancer, but previous studies reported controversial findings. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the associations between Fas/FasL polymorphisms and susceptibility to cervical cancer. We carried out a literature search in PubMed and Embase databases for studies on the associations between Fas/FasL polymorphisms and susceptibility to cervical cancer. The associations were assessed by odds ratio (OR) together with its 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Eleven individual studies with a total of 6,919 subjects were finally included into the meta-analysis. Overall, there was no association between Fas 1377G > A polymorphism and susceptibility to cervical cancer (A vs. G: OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.88-1.12, P = 0.91; AA vs. GG: OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.76-1.32, P = 0.99; AA/GA vs. GG: OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.81-1.12, P = 0.54; AA vs. GG/GA: OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.85-1.43, P = 0.45). In addition, there was also no association between FasL 844 T > C polymorphism and susceptibility to cervical cancer (C vs. T: OR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.91-1.36, P = 0.28; CC vs. TT: OR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.90-1.51, P = 0.24; CC/TC vs. TT: OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.92-1.39, P = 0.24; CC vs. TT/TC: OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.83-1.50, P = 0.47). In subgroup analysis by ethnicity, there were also no associations between Fas/FasL polymorphisms and susceptibility to cervical cancer in Asians and Africans. In conclusion, Fas 1377G > A polymorphism and FasL 844 T > C polymorphism are both not associated with susceptibility to cervical cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24375196What 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.