2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.03.056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The joint effects of arsenic and risk diplotypes of insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 in renal cell carcinoma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All nine case-control studies reporting on the relationship between As exposure and kidney cancer focused on incidence, and these were mostly from Taiwan (n = 7) (Table 5). Six studies [69][70][71][72][73][74] used urinary As concentrations as the metric of exposure and observed a consistent dose-response relationship between the incidence of kidney cancer and the concentration of urinary As. Similarly, Chen et al [44] found a positive relationship between the incidence of kidney cancer and an increasing arseniasis grade, reporting rates of 3.92, 4.71, 5.31 and 8.35 per 100,000 person-years for arseniasis grades 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively.…”
Section: Case-control Studiesmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All nine case-control studies reporting on the relationship between As exposure and kidney cancer focused on incidence, and these were mostly from Taiwan (n = 7) (Table 5). Six studies [69][70][71][72][73][74] used urinary As concentrations as the metric of exposure and observed a consistent dose-response relationship between the incidence of kidney cancer and the concentration of urinary As. Similarly, Chen et al [44] found a positive relationship between the incidence of kidney cancer and an increasing arseniasis grade, reporting rates of 3.92, 4.71, 5.31 and 8.35 per 100,000 person-years for arseniasis grades 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively.…”
Section: Case-control Studiesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Information about missing data and methods for handling missing data were rarely described in the included studies. Sixteen of the 34 studies did not provide any information regarding missing data [43,45,46,48,50,53,[58][59][60]62,68,[70][71][72][73][74], whereas nine excluded >10% of the data due to missingness without attempting to handle the missing data [42,44,51,55,[63][64][65]67,75]. The studies also varied in terms of measuring outcomes.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%