ReviewInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Association of genetic polymorphisms with osteosarcoma risk: a meta-analysis.
Review in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic variants associated with osteosarcoma risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic meta-analysis of genetic variants associated with osteosarcoma susceptibility.Medicine · 2018Pooled it
- No association of TNF-α-308G/A polymorphisms with head and neck cancer risk: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.Medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Genetic polymorphisms in ERCC1 and ERCC2 genes are associated with response to chemotherapy in osteosarcoma patients among Chinese population: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2017Pooled it
- Causes of Childhood Cancer: A Review of the Recent Literature: Part I-Childhood Factors.Cancers · 2024Review
- Article
- Haplotype analysis on relationship of ERCC2 and ERCC3 gene polymorphisms with osteosarcoma risk in Chinese young population.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common pediatric and adult bone malignancy worldwide. Genetic polymorphisms may play critical roles in the development of OS. However, there present inconclusive results. The current study was to investigate the role of genetic polymorphisms in OS risk. Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 and 2014. The odds ratio (OR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI) were employed to estimate the associations. Total 7 studies containing 911 OS patients and 1145 matched controls were included. Our results found that CTLA-4 +49A/G G allele and TGF-β1 29T/C C allele were more frequent in OS patients than that in controls, indicating that these two alleles were significantly associated with increased the risk of OS (G vs. A: OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.13-1.64, P = 0.001; C vs. T: OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.17-1.90, P = 0.001) in a fixed-effect model. This significant relationship was also found under other three genetic models in both variants (P<0.05). While no association was found between TNF-α -308G/A or TNF-β +252A/G polymorphism and OS risk. In conclusion, our results demonstrated that CTLA-4 +49A/G and TGF-β1 29T/C variants were significantly associated with OS susceptibility. Although number of included studies is small, several polymorphisms appearing to significantly influence the OS risk should be focused. Moreover, further studies with gene-gene and gene-environmental interactions should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26309484PMC4538132W1162096763What 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.