ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Cathepsins and neurological diseases: a Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mendelian randomization studies on ischemic stroke: a field synopsis and systematic review.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Aberrant Protein S-Nitrosylation Mimics the Effect of Rare Genetic Mutations in Neurodegenerative Diseases.Journal of neurochemistry · 2026Review
- Stefin A Regulation of Cathepsin B Expression and Localization in Cancerous and Non-Cancerous Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Cathepsins in Neurological Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The causal relationship between cathepsins and neurological diseases remains uncertain. To address this, we utilized a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach to assess the potential causal effect of cathepsins on the development of neurological diseases. Methods: This study conducted a two-sample two-way MR study using pooled data from published genome-wide association studies to evaluate the relationship between 10 cathepsins (B, D, E, F, G, H, L2, O, S, and Z) and 7 neurological diseases, which included ischemic stroke, cerebral hemorrhage, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and epilepsy. The analysis employed various methods such as inverse variance weighting (IVW), weighted median, MR Egger regression, MR pleiotropy residual sum and outlier, Cochran Q statistic, and leave-one-out analysis. Results: We found a causal relationship between cathepsins and neurological diseases, including Cathepsin B and Parkinson's disease (IVW odds ratio (OR): 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83, 0.95, Conclusion: Our study reveals a causal relationship between Cathepsins B, D, E, and O and neurological diseases, offering valuable insights for research aimed at improving the diagnosis and treatment of such conditions.
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.