Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24901479›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Ethnic background and genetic variation in the evaluation of cancer risk: a systematic review.

Lijun Jing, Li Su, Brian Z Ring

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Genetic Variants inGenes · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Obesity shapes selection for driver mutations in cancer.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. Polygenic scores in cancer.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2023
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lijun JingInstitute of Genomic and Personalized Medicine, College of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Li SuKey Laboratory of Molecular Biophysics of Ministry of Education, College of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Brian Z RingInstitute of Genomic and Personalized Medicine, College of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical use of genetic variation in the evaluation of cancer risk is expanding, and thus understanding how determinants of cancer susceptibility identified in one population can be applied to another is of growing importance. However there is considerable debate on the relevance of ethnic background in clinical genetics, reflecting both the significance and complexity of genetic heritage. We address this via a systematic review of reported associations with cancer risk for 82 markers in 68 studies across six different cancer types, comparing association results between ethnic groups and examining linkage disequilibrium between risk alleles and nearby genetic loci. We find that the relevance of ethnic background depends on the question. If asked whether the association of variants with disease risk is conserved across ethnic boundaries, we find that the answer is yes, the majority of markers show insignificant variability in association with cancer risk across ethnic groups. However if the question is whether a significant association between a variant and cancer risk is likely to reproduce, the answer is no, most markers do not validate in an ethnic group other than the discovery cohort's ancestry. This lack of reproducibility is not attributable to studies being inadequately populated due to low allele frequency in other ethnic groups. Instead, differences in local genomic structure between ethnic groups are associated with the strength of association with cancer risk and therefore confound interpretation of the implied physiologic association tracked by the disease allele. This suggest that a biological association for cancer risk alleles may be broadly consistent across ethnic boundaries, but reproduction of a clinical study in another ethnic group is uncommon, in part due to confounding genomic architecture. As clinical studies are increasingly performed globally this has important implications for how cancer risk stratifiers should be studied and employed.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationEthnicityGenetic HeterogeneityGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansLinkage DisequilibriumNeoplasmsOdds RatioRisk

Identifiers

PMID24901479
PMCPMC4046957
OpenAlexW2013107457

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.