ArticleMedicine2026
Causal inference study of the effect of serum enzymes on breast cancer risk: Two-sample Mendelian randomization.
Article in Medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) has the highest cancer incidence and mortality in women worldwide, and the relationship between serum enzymes and BC has been inconsistent in previous observational studies. In this paper, 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) is used to clarify the causal relationship between them. The serum enzymes in 216,026 study subjects from Finnish heritage subjects as the exposure data. The BC included 212,402 study subjects in United Kingdom Biobank as the result data. We performed univariable MR with 5 MR methods inverse variance weighted, MR-Egger regression, weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode and multivariable MR to estimate the effect of serum enzymes independent of BC. Finally, we performed a series of sensitivity analyses as validation of primary MR results. The single nucleotide polymorphisms screened in this study were mostly strong effect instrumental variables. A total of 5 forest plot model results indicate that abnormal serum enzyme levels have a significant causal relationship with BC. MR analysis of different models of abnormal serum enzyme levels gave consistent direction estimates, and their slopes were relatively consistent. Serum enzyme indicators did not consider heterogeneity in the MR results of BC (Cochran Q P value > .05, I 2 < 50%). MR-Egger's results show that there is no effect of pleiotropy(P ≥ .05, intercepts were close to 0). Sensitivity analysis showed that no significant change in the estimated effect value of abnormal serum enzyme levels was found, indicating the stability of the results. inverse variance weighted model results indicate that BC has no causal effect on abnormal serum enzyme levels (P value > .05). The results of multivariate MR showed that serum enzyme indicators still have a significant direct effect on BC. Our findings suggest that a significant statistical causal association between abnormal serum enzyme levels and the risk of BC. Abnormal serum enzyme levels have important clinical implications and might be used as BC risk.
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.