Letter to the editor regarding the publication “Association between matrix-metalloproteinase polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis and systematic review”
Rama Jayaraj,1 Chellan Kumarasamy2
1Clinical Sciences, College of Health and Human Sciences, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, NT, Australia; 2University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
The authors of the article, “Association between matrix-metalloproteinase polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis and systematic review”, Zhou et al, have put forth a number of interesting points.1 This paper, published in the journal Cancer Management and Research attempts to link matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) polymorphisms and the propensity to developing prostate cancer. Though a similar study has previously been done on ovarian cancer by authors credited in this study, this study does tread fresh ground on the topic of prostate cancer and has potential to act as a guideline for future research.
View the original paper by Zhou and colleagues.
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this communication.
Zhou H, Zhu X. Association between matrix-metalloproteinase polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Cancer Manag Res. 2018;10:5247–5259.
Weng H, Zeng XT, Wang XH, Liu TZ, He DL. Genetic association between Matrix Metalloproteinases gene polymorphisms and risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Front Physiol. 2017;8:975–975.
Lin C-C, Wu C-T, Huang S-H, Wu LS-H, Ls-H W. Polymorphisms of matrix metalloproteinases and their association with metastasis and the efficacy of androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer in Taiwanese men. Urological Science. 2015;26(4):259–266.
Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a RANK correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–1101.
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–634.
Duval S, Tweedie R. TRIM and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000;56(2):455–463.
Lee J, Kim KW, Choi SH, Huh J, Park SH, Review S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers—part II. Statistical methods of meta-analysis. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16(6):1188–1196.
Dove Medical Press encourages responsible, free and frank academic debate. The content of the Cancer Management and Research ‘letters to the editor’ section does not necessarily represent the views of Dove Medical Press, its officers, agents, employees, related entities or the Cancer Management and Research editors. While all reasonable steps have been taken to confirm the content of each letter, Dove Medical Press accepts no liability in respect of the content of any letter, nor is it responsible for the content and accuracy of any letter to the editor.
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF]