Evidence mapPaperPMID 39006281Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024

Causal effect analysis of estrogen receptor associated breast cancer and clear cell ovarian cancer.

Li Ji, Yanbo Liu, Zihan Wang, Qiuru Huang, Jiaying Cai, Han Gu, Jiaxin Li, Xia Chen, Chenrui Feng, Xuxin He and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Li JiInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Yanbo LiuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Gusu School, Nanjing Medical University Suzhou 215000, Jiangsu, China.
Zihan WangInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Qiuru HuangInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Jiaying CaiInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Han GuInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Jiaxin LiInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xia ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nantong First People's Hospital, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Chenrui FengInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xuxin HeInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xiaonan DengInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xinmeng ChengInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xiuwen KongInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xiaoqi ZhuInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Tong WuInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Binbin YangInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Ziwen LinInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Xiaoqing YangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Guannan FengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Gusu School, Nanjing Medical University Suzhou 215000, Jiangsu, China.
Jun YuInstitute of Reproductive Medicine, School of Medicine, Nantong University Nantong 226001, Jiangsu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence indicates that the risk of developing a secondary ovarian cancer (OC) is correlated with estrogen receptor (ER) status. However, the clinical significance of the relationship between ER-associated breast cancer (BC) and clear cell ovarian cancer (CCOC) remains elusive.

methodsIndependent single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) strongly correlated with exposure were extracted, and those associated with confounders and outcomes were removed using the PhenoScanner database. SNP effects were extracted from the outcome datasets with minor allele frequency > 0.01 as the filtration criterion. Next, valid instrumental variables (IVs) were obtained by harmonizing exposure and outcome effects and further filtered based on F-statistics (> 10). Mendelian randomization (MR) assessment of valid IVs was carried out using inverse variance weighted (IVW), MR Egger (ME), weighted median (WM), and multiplicative random effects-inverse variance weighted (MRE-IVW) methods. For sensitivity analysis and visualization of MR findings, a heterogeneity test, a pleiotropy test, a leave-one-out test, scatter plots, forest plots, and funnel plots were employed.

resultsMR analyses with all four methods revealed that CCOC was not causally associated with ER-negative BC (IVW results: odds ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.66-1.20, P = 0.431) or ER-positive BC (IVW results: OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88-1.12, P = 0.901). F-statistics were computed for each valid IV, all of which exceeded 10. The stability and reliability of the results were confirmed by sensitivity analysis.

conclusionsOur findings indicated that CCOC dids not have a causal association with ER-associated BC. The absence of a definitive causal link between ER-associated BC and CCOC suggested a minimal true causal influence of ER-associated BC exposure factors on CCOC. These results indicated that individuals afflicted by ER-associated BC could alleviate concerns regarding the developing of CCOC, thereby aiding in preserving their mental well-being stability and optimizing the efficacy of primary disease treatment.

Indexed as

breast cancerClear cell ovarian cancerestrogen receptorinstrumental variablesMendelian randomizationsingle nucleotide polymorphisms

Identifiers

PMID39006281
PMCPMC11236669

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.