ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2019
The influence of GSTT/GSTM null genotypes in scarring.
Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Scoping Review of the Methodology Used in Studies of Genetic Influences on the Development of Keloid or Hypertrophic Scarring in Adults and Children After Acute Wounding.Advances in wound care · 2021Article
- LncRNA TUG1 exhibits pro-fibrosis activity in hypertrophic scar through TAK1/YAP/TAZ pathway via miR-27b-3p.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2021Article
- [Effects and mechanism of eleutheroside E on the growth of human hypertrophic scar fibroblasts].Zhonghua shao shang za zhi = Zhonghua shaoshang zazhi = Chinese journal of burns · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe process of scarring is a common denominator of interest for the medical field. From general medicine to dentistry, pathological scar tissue represents a challenge in providing optimal care to a patient. The present study aims to investigate whether a systemically reduced antioxidant potential, revealed by null isoforms of glutathione S transferase, affects the process of scarring in a group of female patients.
methodsThe study is based on a group of 54 patients with physiological scars after a 6-month observation period, as well as 18 patients with hypertrophic or atrophic scars. Peripheral venous blood was collected, from which DNA was extracted using a commercial kit. Genotyping followed a Multiplex PCR protocol for GSTT1/GSTM1.
resultsIn a dominant model, the combination of wild type (heterozygous or homozygous) GSTT1 and GSTM1 was negatively associated with pathological scarring, with the wild type (heterozygous or homozygous) GSTM1 genotype being potentially responsible for this effect. Other factors affecting pathological scarring were investigated: family history, phototype, as well as scores on the POSAS and SCAR scales.
conclusionsThe presence of GSTT1 and GSTM1 alleles brings forward an increased antioxidant capacity, serving as a protective factor for patients during scar formation.
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.