Association between circulating inflammatory markers and adult cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Tumour-promoting inflammation is a “hallmark” of cancer and conventional epidemiological studies have reported links between various inflammatory markers and cancer risk. The causal nature of these relationships and, thus, the suitability of these markers as intervention targets for cancer prevention is unclear. Methods We meta-analysed 6 genome-wide association studies of circulating inflammatory markers comprising 59,969 participants of European ancestry. We then used combined cis -Mendelian randomization and colocalisation analysis to evaluate the causal role of 66 circulating inflammatory markers in risk of 30 adult cancers in 338,162 cancer cases and up to 824,556 controls. Genetic instruments for inflammatory markers were constructed using genome-wide significant ( P < 5.0 x 10 -8 ) cis -acting SNPs (i.e. in or ±250 kb from the gene encoding the relevant protein) in weak linkage disequilibrium (LD, r 2 < 0.10). Effect estimates were generated using inverse-variance weighted random-effects models and standard errors were inflated to account for weak LD between variants with reference to the 1000 Genomes Phase 3 CEU panel. A false discovery rate (FDR)-corrected P -value (“ q -value”) < 0.05 was used as a threshold to define “strong evidence” to support associations and 0.05 ≤ q -value < 0.20 to define “suggestive evidence”. A colocalisation posterior probability (PPH 4 ) > 70% was employed to indicate support for shared causal variants across inflammatory markers and cancer outcomes. Results We found strong evidence to support an association of genetically-proxied circulating pro-adrenomedullin concentrations with increased breast cancer risk (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10-1.29, q -value=0.033, PPH 4 =84.3%) and suggestive evidence to support associations of interleukin-23 receptor concentrations with increased pancreatic cancer risk (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20-1.69, q -value=0.055, PPH 4 =73.9%), prothrombin concentrations with decreased basal cell carcinoma risk (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53-0.81, q -value=0.067, PPH 4 =81.8%), macrophage migration inhibitory factor concentrations with increased bladder cancer risk (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.05-1.23, q -value=0.072, PPH 4 =76.1%), and interleukin-1 receptor-like 1 concentrations with decreased triple-negative breast cancer risk (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.88-0.97, q -value=0.15), PPH 4 =85.6%). For 22 of 30 cancer outcomes examined, there was little evidence ( q -value ≥ 0.20) that any of the 66 circulating inflammatory markers examined were associated with cancer risk. Conclusion Our comprehensive joint Mendelian randomization and colocalisation analysis of the role of circulating inflammatory markers in cancer risk identified potential roles for 5 circulating inflammatory markers in risk of 5 site-specific cancers. Contrary to reports from some prior conventional epidemiological studies, we found little evidence of association of circulating inflammatory markers with the majority of site-specific cancers evaluated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.076 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".