↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Association between L55M polymorphism in Paraoxonase 1 and cancer risk: a meta-analysis based on 21 studies

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Association between L55M polymorphism in Paraoxonase 1 and cancer risk: a meta-analysis based on 21 studies
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, March 2016
DOI 10.2147/ott.s96990
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lei Chen, Wei Lu, Lu Fang, Hu Xiong, Xun Wu, Meng Zhang, Song Wu, Dexin Yu

Abstract

L55M polymorphism in Paraoxonase 1 (PON1) has been regarded as a risk factor for many cancer types. Nevertheless, the results remain controversial and inconclusive. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of all eligible case-control studies to evaluate the association between L55M polymorphism and cancer risk. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the strength of the associations. Finally, a total of 5,627 cases and 6,390 controls, arising from 21 case-control studies, were enrolled in our study. Significant associations between PON1-L55M polymorphism and overall cancer risk were identified in all genetic models. In the stratified analyses by cancer type, PON1-L55M polymorphism was a risk factor for breast cancer in all genetic models, prostate cancer in the heterozygote model (ML vs LL: OR =1.304, 95% CI =1.049-1.620, P heterogeneity=0.067), and ovarian cancer in the recessive model (MM vs ML/LL: OR =1.526, 95% CI =1.110-2.097, P heterogeneity=0.464). Similarly, an increased risk was also identified for the Caucasian population in the heterozygote comparison and homozygote models, and hospital-based controls in all genetic models. To sum up, our study suggests that the PON1-L55M allele increased the risk of cancer. Future well-designed studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to further verify these findings.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 21%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 March 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#2,078
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,148
of 312,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#75
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 312,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.