ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2022
In-Silico Analysis of Deleterious SNPs of
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational association in parkinson's disease SNPs with brain structural and functional alterations.Neurogenetics · 2025Article
- Comprehensive bioinformatics analysis of selected germline variants of uncertain significance identified in a cohort of Sri Lankan hereditary breast cancer patients.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Article
- Transcriptome signatures of host tissue infected with African swine fever virus reveal differential expression of associated oncogenes.Archives of virology · 2024Review
- In-silico identification of deleterious non-synonymous SNPs of TBX1 gene: Functional and structural impact towards 22q11.2DS.PloS one · 2024Article
- Identification of High-Risk Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in the Human CYB5R3 Gene Responsible for Recessive Congenital Methemoglobinemia: A Computational Approach.Molecular syndromology · 2023Article
- Identifying tumour microenvironment-related signature that correlates with prognosis and immunotherapy response in breast cancer.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Identification ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Dysregulation of fibroblast growth factors is linked to the pathogenesis of bladder cancer. The role of FGF1 and FGF3 is evident in bladder cancer; however, the role of FGF4 is vague. Despite being reported that FGF4 interacts with FGF1 and FGF3 in MAPK pathways, its pathogenesis and mechanism of action are yet to be elucidated. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate pathogenic nsSNPs and their role in the prognosis of bladder cancer by employing in-silico analysis. The nsSNPs of FGF4 were retrieved from the NCBI database. Different in silico tools, PROVEAN, SIFT, PolyPhen-2, SNPs&GO, and PhD-SNP, were used for predicting the pathogenicity of the nsSNPs. Twenty-seven nsSNPs were identified as “damaging”, and further stability analysis using I-Mutant 2.0 and MUPro indicated 22 nsSNPs to cause decreased stability (DDG scores < −0.5). Conservation analysis predicted that Q97K, G106V, N164S, and N167S were highly conserved and exposed. Biophysical characterisation indicated these nsSNPs were not tolerated, and protein-protein interaction analysis showed their involvement in the GFR-MAPK signalling pathway. Furthermore, Kaplan Meier bioinformatics analyses indicated that the FGF4 gene deregulation affected the overall survival rate of patients with bladder cancer, leading to prognostic significance. Thus, based on these analyses, our study suggests that the reported nsSNPs of FGF4 may serve as potential targets for diagnoses and therapeutic interventions focusing on bladder cancer.
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.