ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2025
Genetically proxied risk and protective factors for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Mendelian randomization studies.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite extensive observational evidence implicating lifestyle habits, metabolic factors, hormone levels, predisposing genetic conditions, medications, and other exposures, causal inference regarding pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) risk factors remain contentious due to residual confounding. This Mendelian randomization (MR) meta-analysis was employed to address unresolved etiological controversies and systematically investigate causal relationships between these modifiable factors and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systematic assessment and meta-analysis focusing on studies that employed MR methods to assess the correlation between impact factors and PDAC. We searched five databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid, and ultimately included 82 studies, with 292 independent findings. A meta-analysis was performed on 56 of these influencing factors. Results: Our study found that several factors may be risk factors for PDAC, including body mass index (BMI) [odds ratio (OR): 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-1.36], gut microbiota (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.05-1.49), diabetes mellitus (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), body size (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.48-2.00), fasting insulin (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.61-3.09), hip circumference (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11-1.61) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.04-1.34). Conversely, potential protective factors against PDAC included lycopene intake (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77-0.99) and cathepsin E levels (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.99), and these factors should be further investigated. Conclusions: This meta-analysis of MR studies identified several risk and protective factors for pancreatic cancer, with most showing low heterogeneity. However, these findings represent associations, not causality. These findings may inform clinical risk assessment while awaiting further validation. The study highlights the need for continued research focusing on diverse populations, mechanistic studies, longitudinal investigations, and translational work to advance understanding and develop effective strategies for pancreatic cancer prevention and treatment.
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.