Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31554347›Full record

SynthesisAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2019

Association of MTHFR 677C>T Polymorphism with Susceptibility to Ovarian and Cervical Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mojgan Karimi-Zarchi, Mansour Moghimi, Hajar Abbasi, Amaneh Hadadan, Erfaneh Salimi, Majid Morovati-Sharifabad, Mohammad Javad Akbarian-Bafghi, Masoud Zare-Shehneh, Alireza Mosavi-Jarrahi, Hossein Neamatzadeh

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Interaction ofOpen life sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Common Variants in One-Carbon Metabolism Genes (International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mojgan Karimi-ZarchiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mansour MoghimiDepartment of Pathology, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. Email:moghimim1350@gmail.com
Hajar AbbasiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amaneh HadadanDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Erfaneh SalimiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Majid Morovati-SharifabadDepartment of Basic Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ardakan University, Ardakan, Iran.
Mohammad Javad Akbarian-BafghiDepartment of Healthcare Management, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam, Iran.
Masoud Zare-ShehnehDepartment of Medical Genetics, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Alireza Mosavi-JarrahiDepartment of Social Medicine, Medical School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hossein NeamatzadehDepartment of Medical Genetics, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRShahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services · IRArdakan UniversityBam University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Previous studies have evaluated the impact of MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism on susceptibility to ovarian and cervical cancers in women, but the conclusions are still controversial. To get a more precise evaluation of the association between MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism and risk of ovarian and cervical cancers, we performed a meta-analysis of the association of all eligible studies. Methods: A comprehensive search performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, CNKI, and Web of Science databases to identify the relevant studies up to October 15, 2018. The strength of the association was estimated by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 27 case-control studies including eleven studies with 4990 cases 7730 controls on ovarian cancer and 16 studies with 4990 cases and 7730 controls on cervical cancer were selected. Pooled data revealed that the MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism not significantly associated with an increased risk of ovarian and cervical cancers under all five genetic models. However, stratified analysis by ethnicity showed that the MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism was significantly associated with risk of ovarian cancer in Asians. No publication bias was found in the current meta-analysis. Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis proposes that the MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism may not play a role in development of ovarian and cervical cancers in overall population. Further well-designed studies are necessary to clarify the precise role of the MTHFR 677C>T polymorphism on ovarian and cervical cancers risk.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseasePolymorphism, Single NucleotideCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMethylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (NADPH2)Ovarian NeoplasmsPrognosisRisk FactorsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsMethylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (NADPH2)MTHFR protein, humanCervical cancerMeta-analysisMTHFR geneOvarian CancerPolymorphism

Identifiers

PMID31554347
PMCPMC6976840
OpenAlexW2975487832

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.