ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2024
The causal association of specific gut microbiota on the risk of membranous nephropathy: a Mendelian randomization study.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbiota biomarkers of chronic kidney disease progression identified by 16S rDNA sequencing and machine learning.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Exploration of the pathogenesis of nephrotic syndrome and traditional Chinese medicine intervention based on gut microbiota.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Genetically Predicted Causal Relationship between Gut Microbiota and Various Kidney Diseases.Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGut microbiota transplantation has been reported to improve the renal function of membranous nephropathy (MN). However, whether there is a causal effect of gut microbiota on MN remained unclear.
methodsWe performed two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. The inverse variance weighted (IVW) method was used as the main approach to evaluate the causal relationship between gut microbiota and MN. Additional methods including MR-Egger regression, weighted median, and MR-weighted mode were also conducted. Cochrane's Q test, MR-Egger regression, and MR-PRESSO were employed to detect heterogeneity and pleiotropy, respectively.
resultsA total of 196 gut microbiota were examined. After IVW and sensitivity analysis, eight gut bacteria taxa were observed causal effects on the risk of MN. Specifically, Genus. Oscillibacter was a protective factor (OR: 0.57; 95% CI 0.328-0.979; P = 0.042), while Class. Melainabacteria (OR: 1.51; 95% CI 1.004-2.277; P = 0.048), Genus. Butyricicoccus (OR: 2.16; 95% CI 1.005-4.621; P = 0.048), Genus. Catenibacterium (OR: 1.49; 95% CI 1.043-2.134; P = 0.028), Genus.Ruminiclostridium5 (OR: 1.74; 95% CI 1.053-2.862; P = 0.030), Genus. Ruminococcaceae UCG-003 (OR: 1.73; 95% CI 1.110-2.692; P = 0.015), Order. Bacillales (OR: 1.52; 95% CI 1.135-2.025; P = 0.0048) and Order. Gastranaerophilales (OR: 1.45; 95% CI 1.010-2.085; P = 0.044) were risk factors. Heterogeneity was not significant for most single-nucleotide polymorphisms, and no statistical difference in pleiotropy.
conclusionsThis study first indicated the causal association between specific gut microbiota and MN, which would be of great significance to guide clinical prevention and treatment in MN.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.