CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Synergy of genes and nutrients: the case of homocysteine

Lucock, Mark D·2006·Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care
DOI 10.1097/01.mco.0000247468.18790.1e
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose of review Folic acid is now considered an important functional food component: it lowers potentially toxic homocysteine, prevents birth defects and modulates the risk of several cancers. The complexity of interactions involved, however, means we still have much to learn about the role of folate and homocysteine in both health and disease. Recent findings This review examines the emergence of homocysteine as a public health issue, and places this in context by exploring recent developments in the field of homocysteine as a vasculo, neuro and embryotoxic thiol. The paper also examines the homocysteine nexus in relation to mood disorders and cancer. It ends with an assessment of the issues associated with government-mandated folate fortification. Summary Folate fortification as a population measure may mask B12 deficiency, affect antiepileptic drug seizure control, and influence the genetic selection of a potentially deleterious genotype, albeit over a number of generations. It is likely that only large studies with a comprehensive battery of endpoints that fully address the complexity of nutrient-gene and gene-gene interactions will be able to answer all the necessary questions fully.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.mco.0000247468.18790.1e

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 72

  1. Eaton, 1997, Eur J Clin Nutr, 51, 207, 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600389 · DOI
  2. Eaton, 2002, Prev Med, 34, 109, 10.1006/pmed.2001.0876 · DOI
  3. McCully, 1969, Am J Pathol, 56, 111
  4. McCully, 2001, Perspect Biol Med, 44, 52, 10.1353/pbm.2001.0012 · DOI
  5. Boushey, 1995, JAMA, 274, 1049, 10.1001/jama.1995.03530130055028 · DOI
  6. van der Put, 1995, Lancet, 346, 1070, 10.1016/S0140-6736(95)91743-8 · DOI
  7. Frosst, 1995, Nat Genet, 10, 111, 10.1038/ng0595-111 · DOI
  8. Lewis, 2005, BMJ, 331, 1053, 10.1136/bmj.38611.658947.55 · DOI
  9. Den Heijer, 2005, J Thromb Haemost, 3, 292, 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01141.x · DOI
  10. Kang, 1991, Am J Hum Genet, 48, 536
  11. Bailey, 1999, J Nutr, 129, 919, 10.1093/jn/129.5.919 · DOI
  12. Brattstrom, 1998, Circulation, 98, 2520, 10.1161/01.CIR.98.23.2520 · DOI
  13. Wald, 2002, BMJ, 325, 1202, 10.1136/bmj.325.7374.1202 · DOI
  14. Klerk, 2002, JAMA, 288, 2023, 10.1001/jama.288.16.2023 · DOI
  15. Lentz, 2005, J Thromb Haemost, 3, 1646, 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01364.x · DOI
  16. Undas, 2005, Thromb Haemost, 94, 907, 10.1160/TH05-01-0067 · DOI
  17. Hayden, 2004, Nutr J, 3, 4, 10.1186/1475-2891-3-4 · DOI
  18. Moat, 2004, J Nutr Biochem, 15, 64, 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2003.08.010 · DOI
  19. Vallance, 2001, Clin Sci, 100, 159, 10.1042/cs1000159 · DOI
  20. Stuhlinger, 2001, Circulation, 104, 2569, 10.1161/hc4601.098514 · DOI
  21. Boger, 2003, Clin Chem Lab Med, 41, 1467, 10.1515/CCLM.2003.225 · DOI
  22. Stanger, 2003, Clin Chem, 41, 1444
  23. Xia, 1998, J Biol Chem, 273, 25804, 10.1074/jbc.273.40.25804 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Stroes, 2000, Circ Res, 86, 1129, 10.1161/01.RES.86.11.1129 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Hyndman, 2002, Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 282, 2167, 10.1152/ajpheart.00935.2001 · DOI
  26. Doshi, 2003, Clin Chem Lab Med, 41, 1505, 10.1515/CCLM.2003.231 · DOI
  27. Doshi, 2005, Metabolism, 54, 351, 10.1016/j.metabol.2004.09.015 · DOI
  28. Forman, 2005, JAMA, 293, 320, 10.1001/jama.293.3.320 · DOI
  29. Lievers, 2002, Atherosclerosis, 164, 269, 10.1016/S0021-9150(02)00065-5 · DOI
  30. von Castel-Dunwoody, 2005, Am J Clin Nutr, 81, 1436, 10.1093/ajcn/81.6.1436 · DOI
  31. Yates, 2005, Life Sci, 77, 2735, 10.1016/j.lfs.2005.02.029 · DOI
  32. Durga, 2006, Neurobiol Aging, 27, 482, 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.03.002 · DOI
  33. Matthews, 2001, Acc Chem Res, 34, 681, 10.1021/ar0000051 · DOI
  34. Oteanu, 2001, J Biol Chem, 276, 35558, 10.1074/jbc.M103707200 · DOI
  35. Yates, 2003, Mol Genet Metab, 79, 201, 10.1016/S1096-7192(03)00093-3 · DOI
  36. Yates, 2002, Haematologica, 87, 751
  37. Brown, 2000, J Cardiovasc Risk, 7, 197, 10.1177/204748730000700306 · DOI
  38. Beagle, 2006, J Nutr, 135, 2780, 10.1093/jn/135.12.2780 · DOI
  39. Lucock, 2005, Nutr Res, 26, 180, 10.1016/j.nutres.2006.01.001 · DOI
  40. Ho, 2002, J Neurosci Res, 70, 694, 10.1002/jnr.10416 · DOI
  41. Seshadri, 2002, N Engl J Med, 346, 476, 10.1056/NEJMoa011613 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Lee, 2005, Neurotoxicology, 26, 361, 10.1016/j.neuro.2005.01.008 · DOI
  43. de Lau, 2005, Ann Neurol, 57, 927, 10.1002/ana.20509 · DOI
  44. Morris, 2003, Lancet Neurol, 2, 425, 10.1016/S1474-4422(03)00438-1 · DOI
  45. Ravaglia, 2005, Am J Clin Nutr, 82, 636, 10.1093/ajcn/82.3.636 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Bottiglieri, 2005, Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry, 29, 1103, 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2005.06.021 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Coppen, 2005, J Psychopharmacol, 19, 59, 10.1177/0269881105048899 · DOI
  48. Butterworth, 1993, J Am Coll Nutr, 12, 438, 10.1080/07315724.1993.10718334 · DOI
  49. Lucock, 2004, BMJ, 328, 211, 10.1136/bmj.328.7433.211 · DOI
  50. Slattery, 1999, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 8, 513
  51. Ma, 1997, Cancer Res, 57, 1098
  52. Choi, 2005, Clin Chem Lab Med, 43, 1151, 10.1515/CCLM.2005.200 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Powers, 2005, J Nutr, 135, 2960S, 10.1093/jn/135.12.2960S · DOI
  54. Sohn, 2004, J Natl Cancer Inst, 96, 134, 10.1093/jnci/djh015 · DOI
  55. Kim, 2005, Nutr Rev, 63, 398, 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2005.tb00377.x · DOI
  56. Kim, 2005, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 3, 738, 10.1016/S1542-3565(05)00489-1 · DOI
  57. Lucock, 2005, Nat Rev – Genet, 6, 235, 10.1038/nrg1558 · DOI
  58. Munoz-Moran, 1998, Lancet, 352, 1120, 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79761-0 · DOI
  59. Reyes-Engel, 2002, Mol Hum Reprod, 8, 952, 10.1093/molehr/8.10.952 · DOI
  60. Lucock, 2003, Nutr Res, 23, 1463, 10.1016/S0271-5317(03)00156-8 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Duthie, 1998, FASEB J, 12, 1491, 10.1096/fasebj.12.14.1491 · DOI
  62. Eskes, 2000, Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol, 27, 157
  63. Isotalo, 2000, Am J Hum Genet, 67, 986, 10.1086/303082 · DOI
  64. Van der Put, 1998, Am J Hum Genet, 62, 1044, 10.1086/301825 · DOI
  65. Wilson, 1999, Mol Genet Metab, 67, 317, 10.1006/mgme.1999.2879 · DOI
  66. Mitchell, 2005, Am J Med Genet, 135C, 88, 10.1002/ajmg.c.30057 · DOI
  67. Kelly, 1997, Am J Clin Nutr, 65, 1790, 10.1093/ajcn/65.6.1790 · DOI
  68. Lucock, 1989, Biochem Med Metab Biol, 42, 30, 10.1016/0885-4505(89)90038-8 · DOI
  69. Charles, 2004, BMJ, 329, 1375, 10.1136/bmj.329.7479.1375 · DOI
  70. Ulvik, 2001, Am J Med Genet, 101, 246, 10.1002/ajmg.1370 · DOI
  71. Ulrich, 2002, Cancer Res, 62, 3361
  72. Haggarty, 2006, Lancet, 367, 1513, 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68651-0 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 24

Metadata

Authors
Lucock, M. D.
Venue
Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2006-11
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
748-756
ISSN
1363-1950
DOI
10.1097/01.mco.0000247468.18790.1e
Cited by
24
References
2
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review