ArticleCancer genomics & proteomics
The Association Between the Genetic
Article in Cancer genomics & proteomics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is a multifactorial disease involving complex interactions between genetic and physiological/environmental factors. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) plays a role in numerous cellular pathways and it has been suggested that VDR genetic variants influence individual susceptibility to PCa. MATERIALS AND
methodsLogistic regression analysis was used to assess the association of six VDR single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and factors such as tanning potential and UV sunlight exposure with PCa risk.
resultsMarginal significant interactions were found, with a 2-fold increase risk of PCa between SNP 1 (c.278-69G>A) and sunlight UV exposure [odds ratio (OR)=2.02, 95% confidence intervaI (CI)=1.036-4.36; p=0.05]; and a 4-fold increase risk of PCa between SNP 4 (c.907+75C>T) and tanning potential (OR=4.40, 95% CI=0.89-29.12; p=0.0591). In contrast, SNP 5 (rs731236, TaqI) and tanning potential interaction had a protective effect by reducing the risk of PCa by 55% (β=-0.804; OR=0.448, 95% CI=0.197-9.42; p=0.0427). SNPs 2 (rs61614328) and 6 (rs533037428) did not show any association with PCa even in the presence of UV sunlight exposure.
conclusionThe protective effect of SNP 4 from PCa is lost and modified by tanning potential in African Americans. This finding needs to be verified by larger studies in different ethnic populations.
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.