Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26545608›Full record

SynthesisFamilial cancer2016

CYP1A1 and GSTP1 gene variations in breast cancer: a systematic review and case-control study.

Sumaira Akhtar, Ishrat Mahjabeen, Zertashia Akram, Mahmood Akhtar Kayani

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Familial cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Unveiling the Role of GlutathioneACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. JHDM1D-AS1-driven inhibition of miR-940 releases ARTN expression to induce breast carcinogenesis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023
    Article
  7. Role ofInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Journal of breast cancer · 2019
    Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sumaira AkhtarCancer Genetics Lab, Department of Biosciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan.
Ishrat MahjabeenCancer Genetics Lab, Department of Biosciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan.
Zertashia AkramCancer Genetics Lab, Department of Biosciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan.
Mahmood Akhtar KayaniCancer Genetics Lab, Department of Biosciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan. mkayani@comsats.edu.pk.
COMSATS University Islamabad · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In first part of this study, a systematic review was designed to explore the involvement of CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes in breast cancerogenesis. Based on systematic review, we designed a study to screen CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes for mutation and their possible association with breast carcinogenesis. A total of 400 individuals were collected and analyzed by PCR-SSCP. After sequence analysis of coding region of CYP1A1 we identified eleven mutations in different exons of respective gene. Among these eleven mutations, ~3 folds increased breast cancer risk was found associated with Asp82Glu mutation (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.26-7.09), with Ser83Thr mutation (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.26-7.09) and with Glu86Ala mutation (OR 3.18; 95% CI 1.27-7.93) in cancer patients compared to controls. Furthermore, ~4 folds increase in breast cancer risk was found associated with Asp347Glu, Phe398Tyr and 5178delT mutations (OR 3.92; 95% CI 1.35-11.3) in patients compared to controls. The sequence analysis of GSTP1 resulted in identification of total five mutations. Among these five mutations, ~3 folds increase in breast cancer risk was observed associated with 1860G>A mutation, with 1861-1876delCAGCCCTCTGGAGTGG mutation (OR 2.70; 95% CI 1.10-6.62) and with 1861C>A mutation (OR 2.97; 95% CI 1.01-8.45) in cancer patients compared to controls. Furthermore, ~5 folds increase in breast cancer risk was associated with 1883G>T mutation (OR 4.75; 95% CI 1.46-15.3) and ~6 folds increase in breast cancer risk was found associated with Iso105Val mutation (OR 6.43; 95% CI 1.41-29.3) in cancer patients compared to controls. Our finding, based on systematic review and experimental data suggest that the polymorphic CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genes may contribute to risk of developing breast cancer.

Indexed as

AdultBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesCytochrome P-450 CYP1A1FemaleGenetic Association StudiesGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGlutathione S-Transferase piHumansMiddle AgedMutationPakistanPolymorphism, GeneticPolymorphism, Single-Stranded ConformationalCYP1A1 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP1A1Glutathione S-Transferase piGSTP1 protein, humanBreast cancerCYP1A1GSTP1MutationsSSCPXenobiotic metabolizing pathway

Identifiers

PMID26545608
OpenAlexW2167284449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.