Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29732392›Full record

ArticleBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2018

Bladder Cancer Genetic Susceptibility. A Systematic Review.

Evangelina López de Maturana, Marta Rava, Chiaka Anumudu, Olga Sáez, Dolores Alonso, Núria Malats

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Association ofSouth Asian journal of cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

6 authors.

Evangelina López de MaturanaGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.
Marta RavaGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.
Chiaka AnumuduGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.
Olga SáezGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.
Dolores AlonsoGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.
Núria MalatsGenetic and Molecular Epidemiology Group, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), and CIBERONC, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe variant/gene candidate approach to explore bladder cancer (BC) genetic susceptibility has been applied in many studies with significant findings reported. However, results are not always conclusive due to the lack of replication by subsequent studies.

objectivesTo identify all epidemiological investigations on the genetic associations with BC risk, to quantify the likely magnitude of the associations by applying metaanalysis methodology and to assess whether there is a potential for publication/reporting bias.

methodsTo address our aims, we have catalogued all genetic association studies published in the field of BC risk since 2000. Furthermore, we metaanalysed all polymorphisms with data available from at least three independent case-control studies with subjects of Caucasian origin analyzed under the same mode of inheritance.

resultsThe characterization of the genetic susceptibility of BC is composed of 28 variants, GWAS contributing most of them. Most of the significant variants associated with BC risk are located in genes belonging to chemical carcinogenesis, DNA repair, and cell cycle pathways. Causal relationship was also provided by functional analysis for

conclusionsGenetic susceptibility of BC is still poorly defined, with GWAS contributing most of the strongest evidence. The systematic review did not provide evidence of further genetic associations. The potential public health translation of the existing knowledge on genetic susceptibility on BC is still limited.

Indexed as

Bladder cancergenegenetic susceptibilitygenetic variantmetaanalysispathway

Identifiers

PMID29732392
PMCPMC5929300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.