A comprehensive assessment of single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with pancreatic cancer risk

Abstract

Background: Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been inconsistently associated with pancreatic cancer (PC) risk. This meta-analysis aimed to synthesize relevant data on SNPs associated with PC. Methods: Databases were searched to identify association studies of SNPs and PC published through January 2020 from the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP) and Wanfang databases. Network meta-analysis and Thakkinstian algorithm were used to select the most appropriate genetic model, along with false positive report probability (FPRP) for noteworthy associations. The methodological quality of data was assessed based on the STREGA statement Stata 14.0 will be used for systematic review and meta-analysis. Results: This study will provide a high-quality evidence to find the SNP most associated with pancreatic cancer susceptibility and the best genetic model. Conclusions: This study will explore which SNP is most associated with pancreatic cancer susceptibility. Registration: INPLASY202040023.

Identification of SNPs in hMSH3/MSH6 interaction domain affecting the structure and function of MSH2 protein

“…6 The significant improvement in the GWAS result has provided a great chance to analyze the possible effect of common genetic variations on complex diseases by analyzing critical attributes of the results for the associated SNPs. 7 The genetic variations or SNPs present in the coding and noncoding part of the DNA may also be involved in the occurrence of a disease. 8 As the rate of occurrence for these variations is very high (1 in every 100-300 nucleotides), human DNA can accumulate many SNPs.…”

“…In the last decade, a large number of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been analyzed by genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) and witnessed the relationships between the SNPs and diseases associated with them 6 . The significant improvement in the GWAS result has provided a great chance to analyze the possible effect of common genetic variations on complex diseases by analyzing critical attributes of the results for the associated SNPs 7 . The genetic variations or SNPs present in the coding and noncoding part of the DNA may also be involved in the occurrence of a disease 8 .…”

EvIPqPCR, Target Circulating Tumorous Extracellular Vesicles for Detection of Pancreatic Cancer

“…7,8 Some studies aim to translate EVs and mitochondrial abnormality into tumor biomarkers using a single biomarker or marker signature, such as mitochondrial microRNA, which controls the activity of mitochondria. 4,9 Also, single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) has been linked to an increased risk for specific cancer types, including pancreatic cancer, 10 and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels have been used to detect pancreatic cancer recurrence during postoperative follow-up. 11−13 However, most of these biomarkers are subtype-specific, leading to false results.…”

“…For decades, the “Warburg effect” has advocated that mitochondrial abnormality plays a crucial role in the development and progression of cancers, including pancreatic cancer. Certain tumor types exhibit striking numerical increases in mitochondria, which have been linked to contrasting clinical outcomes. , Some studies aim to translate EVs and mitochondrial abnormality into tumor biomarkers using a single biomarker or marker signature, such as mitochondrial microRNA, which controls the activity of mitochondria. , Also, single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) has been linked to an increased risk for specific cancer types, including pancreatic cancer, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels have been used to detect pancreatic cancer recurrence during postoperative follow-up. − However, most of these biomarkers are subtype-specific, leading to false results . These false results may be due to variations in sample purity, causing conflicting conclusions and poor quality control.…”