ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2024
Identification of Potential Drug Targets for Myopia Through Mendelian Randomization.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- CPNE1: A novel therapeutic target for myopia progression - from genetic GWAS discovery to functional validation in vitro and vivo.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Pooled it
- DNA methylation biomarkers and myopia: a multi-omics study integrating GWAS, mQTL and eQTL data.Clinical epigenetics · 2024Pooled it
- IMI-Myopia Genetics Report.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Review
- Associations Between Myopia and Brain Volumes: An Observational and Genetic Analysis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Observational
- Ferroptosis in ocular diseases: mechanisms, crosstalk with other cell death pathways, and therapeutic prospects.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Potential protective role ofFrontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Causal relationship between multiple types of food intake and myopia: a Mendelian randomization study.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify potential drug targets for myopia and explore underlying mechanisms. Methods: Mendelian randomization (MR) was implemented to assess the effect of 2684 pharmacologically targetable genes in the blood and retina on the risk of myopia from a genomewide association study (GWAS) for age-at-onset of spectacle wearing-inferred mean spherical equivalent (MSE; discovery cohort, N = 287,448, European), which was further validated in a GWAS for autorefraction-measured MSE (replication cohort, N = 95,619, European). The reliability of the identified significant potential targets was strengthened by colocalization analysis. Additionally, enrichment analysis, protein-protein interaction network, and molecular docking were performed to explore the functional roles and the druggability of these targets. Results: This systematic drug target identification has unveiled 6 putative genetically causal targets for myopia-CD34, CD55, Wnt3, LCAT, BTN3A1, and TSSK6-each backed by colocalization evidence in adult blood eQTL datasets. Functional analysis found that dopaminergic neuron differentiation, cell adhesion, Wnt signaling pathway, and plasma lipoprotein-associated pathways may be involved in myopia pathogenesis. Finally, drug prediction and molecular docking corroborated the pharmacological value of these targets with LCAT demonstrating the strongest binding affinity. Conclusions: Our study not only opens new avenues for the development of therapeutic interventions for myopia but may also help to understand the underlying mechanisms of myopia.
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.