Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24818791›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Genetic variation in the TP53 pathway and bladder cancer risk. a comprehensive analysis.

Silvia Pineda, Roger L Milne, M Luz Calle, Nathaniel Rothman, Evangelina López de Maturana, Jesús Herranz, Manolis Kogevinas, Stephen J Chanock, Adonina Tardón, Mirari Márquez and 10 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Biomarkers and intermediate-high risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a multivariate analysis of three different cellular pathways with pronostic implications.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

20 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Silvia PinedaSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Roger L MilneSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
M Luz CalleSystems Biology Department, University of Vic, Vic, Spain.
Nathaniel RothmanDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Evangelina López de MaturanaSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Jesús HerranzSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Manolis KogevinasCentre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain; Institut Municipal d'Investigació Mèdica - Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Stephen J ChanockDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Adonina TardónDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
Mirari MárquezSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Lin T GueySpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Montserrat García-ClosasDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Josep LloretaInstitut Municipal d'Investigació Mèdica - Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain; Departament de Patologia, Hospital del Mar - IMAS, Barcelona, Spain.
Erin BaumSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Anna González-NeiraSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Alfredo CarratoServicio de Oncología, Hospital Universitario de Elche, Elche, Spain; Servicio de Oncología, Hospital Universitario Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Arcadi NavarroDepartament de Ciències Experimentals i de la Salut, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain; Institut de Biologia Evolutiva (UPF-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain; Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Barcelona, Spain; Instituto Nacional de Bioinformática, Barcelona, Spain.
Debra T SilvermanDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Francisco X RealSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain; Departament de Ciències Experimentals i de la Salut, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Núria MalatsSpanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain.
Spanish National Cancer Research Centre · ESNational Cancer Institute · USCentro de Investigación del Cáncer · ESCenter for Research in Environmental Epidemiology · ESHospital Del Mar · ESHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal · ESPompeu Fabra University · ESUniversidad de Oviedo · ESUniversitat de Vic - Universitat Central de Catalunya · ES

Funding

GENETIC MARKERS OF BLADDER CANCER PROGRESSIONR01CA089715 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ALBERTSON, DONNA G · 2001 to 2012
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA089715NCI NIH HHS R01-CA089715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGermline variants in TP63 have been consistently associated with several tumors, including bladder cancer, indicating the importance of TP53 pathway in cancer genetic susceptibility. However, variants in other related genes, including TP53 rs1042522 (Arg72Pro), still present controversial results. We carried out an in depth assessment of associations between common germline variants in the TP53 pathway and bladder cancer risk. MATERIAL AND

methodsWe investigated 184 tagSNPs from 18 genes in 1,058 cases and 1,138 controls from the Spanish Bladder Cancer/EPICURO Study. Cases were newly-diagnosed bladder cancer patients during 1998-2001. Hospital controls were age-gender, and area matched to cases. SNPs were genotyped in blood DNA using Illumina Golden Gate and TaqMan assays. Cases were subphenotyped according to stage/grade and tumor p53 expression. We applied classical tests to assess individual SNP associations and the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO)-penalized logistic regression analysis to assess multiple SNPs simultaneously.

resultsBased on classical analyses, SNPs in BAK1 (1), IGF1R (5), P53AIP1 (1), PMAIP1 (2), SERINPB5 (3), TP63 (3), and TP73 (1) showed significant associations at p-value≤0.05. However, no evidence of association, either with overall risk or with specific disease subtypes, was observed after correction for multiple testing (p-value≥0.8). LASSO selected the SNP rs6567355 in SERPINB5 with 83% of reproducibility. This SNP provided an OR = 1.21, 95%CI 1.05-1.38, p-value = 0.006, and a corrected p-value = 0.5 when controlling for over-estimation. DISCUSSION: We found no strong evidence that common variants in the TP53 pathway are associated with bladder cancer susceptibility. Our study suggests that it is unlikely that TP53 Arg72Pro is implicated in the UCB in white Europeans. SERPINB5 and TP63 variation deserve further exploration in extended studies.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic VariationGenotypeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolymorphism, Single NucleotideTumor Suppressor Protein p53Urinary Bladder NeoplasmsYoung AdultTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID24818791
PMCPMC4018346
OpenAlexW2048844375

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.