ArticleOncology letters2026
Cumulative evidence for associations between matrix metalloproteinase-1, -3 and -8 variants and cancer risk.
Article in Oncology letters, 2026. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) gene polymorphisms have been implicated in cancer susceptibility; however, the results from previous studies have been inconsistent across populations and tumor types. The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the associations between MMP-1, MMP-3 and MMP-8 polymorphisms and cancer risk through a comprehensive meta-analysis. A total of 36,368 cancer cases and 40,246 controls from eligible studies were included. Pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the associations between selected MMP polymorphisms and cancer risk. Venice criteria and false-positive report probability were applied to evaluate the cumulative evidence. Subgroup analyses according to ethnicity, genetic model and cancer type were conducted. Functional annotation was also integrated to explore potential biological mechanisms. In total, three polymorphisms (MMP-3 rs35068180, MMP-3 rs3025058 and MMP-1 rs1799750) were found to be significantly associated with the risk of seven types of cancer. Of these, strong evidence was assigned to two single nucleotide polymorphisms for three cancer risks (four associations), including MMP-3 rs3025058 with esophageal cancer in all populations under the dominant model, MMP-1 rs1799750 with glioblastoma in all populations under the recessive model and MMP-1 rs1799750 with renal cancer in all populations under both the recessive and allelic models. A total of six associations showed moderate evidence, while 14 were classified as weak. Notably, the effect sizes and statistical significance varied by ethnicity, genetic model and cancer type, suggesting context-dependent and population-specific effects. Functional annotation indicated that key variants may affect gene expression and tumor biology via regulation of promoter or enhancer activity. No significant association was observed between MMP-8 polymorphisms and cancer risk. The findings provide new insights into the complexity of gene-environment interactions underlying cancer susceptibility. This comprehensive meta-analysis highlights the complex, context-dependent associations of MMP-1, MMP-3 and MMP-8 polymorphisms with cancer risk. The results of the present study underscore the need for large, multi-ethnic studies and integrated genomic, functional and environmental analyses to clarify the roles of MMP variants in cancer development and to identify high-risk populations for precision prevention.
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.