| Title |
Quantitative assessment of the clinical susceptibility of calcium-sensing receptor polymorphisms in cancer patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Management and Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cmar.s147751 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haohai Huang, Tao Li, Dan Liao, Zhu Zhu, Yong Dong |
| Abstract |
Accumulating evidence has suggested a relationship between calcium-sensing receptor (CASR) polymorphisms and cancer risk in different types of cancer; however, the findings from epidemiologic studies have been conflicting. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the clinical susceptibility of CASR polymorphisms in cancer patients. This study systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for eligible articles through March 2017. The strength of association was expressed as odds ratio and 95% CI. Publication bias, heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analyses were also examined. Fourteen related case-control studies were finally identified to be included in the present analysis. The pooled result showed that no significant associations were found among CASR rs1801725, rs1042636, rs12485716, rs4678174, rs1801726, rs17251221, rs10934578, and rs2270916 polymorphisms and cancer risk under all genetic models (P>0.05). The relationship between CASR rs1801725 polymorphism and risk of cancer was consistent in the subgroup analyses, and robust in sensitivity analysis. No publication bias was presented in our pooled-analysis. The current evidence for our pooled analysis suggests that the CASR polymorphisms are not associated with an increased risk of cancer. Further larger studies are still necessary to warrant and validate the findings in the current meta-analysis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Librarian | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,603,172
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#1,056
of 2,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,618
of 330,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#36
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,017 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.