SynthesisScientific reports2022
DNA repair phenotype and cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 55 case-control studies.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment and detection of nucleotide excision repair capability in human cells: a critical review of current functional methods.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Bipolar disorder and somatic diseases: Focus on oxidative stress markers.Neuroscience applied · 2026Review
- Comprehensive Measurement of Inter-Individual Variation in DNA Repair Capacity in Healthy Individuals.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Wogonin inhibits radiation-induced DNA damage repair in hepatocellular carcinoma cells by upregulating p21.The Korean journal of physiology & pharmacology : official journal of the Korean Physiological Society and the Korean Society of Pharmacology · 2025Article
- Germline Whole-Exome Sequencing in Non-Smoker Lung Cancer Patients Reveals Pathogenic Variants in Lung Cancer Driver Genes.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- Recent advances in the role of high-salt diet in anti- and pro-cancer progression.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Cosmic Ionizing Radiation: A DNA Damaging Agent That May Underly Excess Cancer in Flight Crews.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- New Facets of DNA Double Strand Break Repair: Radiation Dose as Key Determinant of HR versus c-NHEJ Engagement.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- High-throughput measurement of double strand break global repair phenotype in peripheral blood mononuclear cells after long-term cryopreservation.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2023Article
- Molecular Biomarkers in Cancer.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Human Variation in DNA Repair, Immune Function, and Cancer Risk.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis reveals significant associations between Serum DNA repair proteins and liver cancer.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA repair phenotype can be measured in blood and may be a potential biomarker of cancer risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies of DNA repair phenotype and cancer through March 2021. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) of cancer risk for those with the lowest DNA repair capacity compared with those with the highest capacity. We included 55 case-control studies that evaluated 12 different cancers using 10 different DNA repair assays. The pooled OR of cancer risk (all cancer types combined) was 2.92 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.49, 3.43) for the lowest DNA repair. Lower DNA repair was associated with all studied cancer types, and pooled ORs (95% CI) ranged from 2.02 (1.43, 2.85) for skin cancer to 7.60 (3.26, 17.72) for liver cancer. All assays, except the homologous recombination repair assay, showed statistically significant associations with cancer. The effect size ranged from 1.90 (1.00, 3.60) for the etoposide-induced double-strand break assay to 5.06 (3.67, 6.99) for the γ-H2AX assay. The consistency and strength of the associations support the use of these phenotypic biomarkers; however large-scale prospective studies will be important for understanding their use related to age and screening initiation.
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.