SynthesisOncotarget2016
Systematic meta-analyses of gene-specific genetic association studies in prostate cancer.
Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging Random Effects in Cistrome-Wide Association Studies for Decoding the Genetic Determinants of Prostate Cancer.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Novel prostate cancer susceptibility gene SP6 predisposes patients to aggressive disease.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2021Article
- The mechanism of activation of the actin binding protein EHBP1 by Rab8 family members.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Unraveling the Function of Lemur Tyrosine Kinase 2 Network.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Review
- Association Between the Asp312Asn, Lys751Gln, and Arg156Arg Polymorphisms inTechnology in cancer research & treatment · 2017Article
- A spatiotemporal hypothesis for the regulation, role, and targeting of AMPK in prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past twenty-five years, over 700 case-control association studies on the risk of prostate cancer have been published worldwide, but their results were largely inconsistent. To facilitate following and explaining these findings, we performed a systematic meta-analysis using allelic contrasts for gene-specific SNVs from at least three independent population-based case-control studies, which were published in the field of prostate cancer between August 1, 1990 and August 1, 2015. Across 66 meta-analyses, a total of 20 genetic variants involving 584,100 subjects in 19 different genes (KLK3, IGFBP3, ESR1, SOD2, CAT, CYP1B1, VDR, RFX6, HNF1B, SRD5A2, FGFR4, LEP, HOXB13, FAS, FOXP4, SLC22A3, LMTK2, EHBP1 and MSMB) exhibited significant association with prostate cancer. The average summary OR was 1.33 (ranging from: 1.016-3.788) for risk alleles and 0.838 (ranging from: 0.757-0.896) for protective alleles. Of these positive variants, FOXP4 rs1983891, LMTK2 rs6465657 and RFX6 rs339331 had not been previously meta-analyzed. Further analyses with sufficient power design and investigations of the potential biological roles of these genetic variants in prostate cancer should be conducted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.