SynthesisBioscience reports2020
Association between the combined effects of GSTM1 present/null and CYP1A1 MspI polymorphisms with lung cancer risk: an updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Bioscience reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interaction between CYP1A1 gene polymorphism and environment factors on risk of endometrial cancer.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2024Article
- The Relationship ofJournal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany studies have been performed to explore the combined effects of glutathione-S-transferase M1 (GSTM1) present/null and cytochrome P4501A1 (CYP1A1) MspI polymorphisms with lung cancer (LC) risk, but the results are contradictory. Two previous meta-analyses have been reported on the issue in 2011 and 2014. However, several new articles since then have been published. In addition, their meta-analyses did not valuate the credibility of significantly positive results.
objectivesWe performed an updated meta-analysis to solve the controversy following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
methodsFalse-positive report probability (FPRP), Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP), and the Venice criteria were used to verify the credibility of meta-analyses.
resultsTwenty-three publications including 5734 LC cases and 7066 controls met the inclusion criteria in the present study. A significantly increased risk of LC was found in overall analysis, Asians and Indians. However, all positive results were considered as 'less-credible' when we used the Venice criteria, FPRP, and BFDP test to assess the credibility of the positive results.
conclusionThese positive findings should be interpreted with caution and results indicate that significant associations may be less-credible, there are no significantly increased LC risk between the combined effects of GSTM1 present/null and CYP1A1 MspI polymorphisms.
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.