Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24651674›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Contribution of environment and genetics to pancreatic cancer susceptibility.

Barbara A Hocevar, Lisa M Kamendulis, Xinzhu Pu, Susan M Perkins, Zheng-Yu Wang, Erica L Johnston, John M DeWitt, Lang Li, Patrick J Loehrer, James E Klaunig and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Barbara A HocevarDepartment of Environmental Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Lisa M KamendulisDepartment of Environmental Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Xinzhu PuDepartment of Environmental Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America.
Susan M PerkinsIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Zheng-Yu WangIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Erica L JohnstonIndiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
John M DeWittIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Lang LiIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Patrick J LoehrerIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
James E KlaunigDepartment of Environmental Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of America; Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
E Gabriela ChioreanIndiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America; University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Indiana University Bloomington · USIndiana University Health · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USIndiana University School of Medicine

Funding

Women's health: interplay of maternal diet and key demographics on neurological health in the rural frontier and remote WestP20GM103408 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO · PI Scott A Minnich · 2012 to 2026
$59.8M
Tumor Microenvironment and Metastasis ProgramP30CA082709 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI Jun Wan · 1999 to 2026
$59.3M
Quality Assurance and Quality Control Project Management: Improving Submissions and Study Conduct in the Human Subjects Research Prior Approval ProcessUL1TR002529 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI MOE, SHARON M, WIEHE, SARAH ELIZABETH · 2018 to 2022
$27.2M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteUL1TR001108 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$23.3M
Role of Kupffer Cell in Hepatic CarcinogenesisR01CA100908 · NCI · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI KLAUNIG, JAMES E · 2005 to 2009
$1.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001108NCI NIH HHS P30 CA082709NCI NIH HHS R01 CA100908NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103408
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several risk factors have been identified as potential contributors to pancreatic cancer development, including environmental and lifestyle factors, such as smoking, drinking and diet, and medical conditions such as diabetes and pancreatitis, all of which generate oxidative stress and DNA damage. Oxidative stress status can be modified by environmental factors and also by an individual's unique genetic makeup. Here we examined the contribution of environment and genetics to an individual's level of oxidative stress, DNA damage and susceptibility to pancreatic cancer in a pilot study using three groups of subjects: a newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer group, a healthy genetically-unrelated control group living with the case subject, and a healthy genetically-related control group which does not reside with the subject. Oxidative stress and DNA damage was evaluated by measuring total antioxidant capacity, direct and oxidative DNA damage by Comet assay, and malondialdehyde levels. Direct DNA damage was significantly elevated in pancreatic cancer patients (age and sex adjusted mean ± standard error: 1.00 ± 0.05) versus both healthy unrelated and related controls (0.70 ± 0.06, p<0.001 and 0.82 ± 0.07, p = 0.046, respectively). Analysis of 22 selected SNPs in oxidative stress and DNA damage genes revealed that CYP2A6 L160H was associated with pancreatic cancer. In addition, DNA damage was found to be associated with TNFA -308G>A and ERCC4 R415Q polymorphisms. These results suggest that measurement of DNA damage, as well as select SNPs, may provide an important screening tool to identify individuals at risk for development of pancreatic cancer.

Indexed as

EnvironmentGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCase-Control StudiesDemographyDNA DamageFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOxidative StressPancreatic NeoplasmsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID24651674
PMCPMC3961224
OpenAlexW1991290371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.