Observational studyThe Journal of international medical research2026
Causal effects of blood and urinary biomarkers on cancer risk: A Mendelian randomization study.
Observational study in The Journal of international medical research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveObservational studies have linked various serum and urinary biomarkers to cancer risk, but confounding and reverse causation limit causal inference. This study aimed to investigate the causal effects of 35 circulating biomarkers on the risk of 13 site-specific cancers.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis using genetic instruments for 35 biomarkers from the UK Biobank (N = 363,228). Summary-level data for 13 cancers were obtained from the FinnGen consortium and IEU Open genome-wide association study. We employed inverse-variance weighted as the primary method, supplemented by sensitivity analyses. Significant associations were further scrutinized using bidirectional Mendelian randomization to rule out reverse causality and multivariable Mendelian randomization to assess independent effects.ResultsForward Mendelian randomization identified 49 associations. After false discovery rate correction, nine remained: colorectal cancer-nonalbumin protein (odds ratio = 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.93), total protein (odds ratio = 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.93), and uric acid (odds ratio = 0.89, 95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.97); gastric cancer-apolipoprotein B (odds ratio = 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.95) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (odds ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.95); liver cancer-gamma-glutamyl transferase (odds ratio = 1.29, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.50); breast cancer-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (odds ratio = 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.13); and esophageal cancer-total cholesterol (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-0.90). Reverse Mendelian randomization suggested no reverse causality except breast cancer on C-reactive protein. Multivariable Mendelian randomization confirmed 12 biomarkers with independent effects: liver cancer (cholesterol, gamma-glutamyl transferase, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein); breast cancer (C-reactive protein, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and insulin-like growth factor 1); gastric cancer (apolipoprotein B, low-density lipoprotein, and sex hormone-binding globulin); colorectal cancer (insulin-like growth factor 1 and uric acid); plus single markers for thyroid cancer (blood urea nitrogen), cervical cancer (C-reactive protein), ovarian cancer (direct bilirubin), and endometrial cancer (sex hormone-binding globulin).ConclusionsThis large-scale Mendelian randomization study provides robust evidence supporting the tissue-specific causal roles of several circulating biomarkers in the pathogenesis of specific cancers. These findings enhance our understanding of cancer etiology and highlight potential biomarkers for risk assessment and prevention.
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.