MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390079469 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3774978/v1

Mendelian Randomization Study: Genetic Prediction of Blood Metabolites and the Risk of Endometrial Cancer

2023· preprint· en· W4390079469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiu Ting, Haoqing She, Ouyang ZhenBo

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMendelian randomizationEndometrial cancerGenome-wide association studyOncologyOdds ratioInternal medicineMedicineGenetic associationMetaboliteLinkage disequilibriumConfidence intervalCausal inferenceCancerSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneticsBiologyGenotypeGeneGenetic variantsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Metabolic dysregulation is a hallmark of cancer. However, evidence of a causal relationship between circulating metabolites and the promotion or prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is still lacking. We conducted a two-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR) analysis to assess the causal relationship between 1,400 genetically proxied blood metabolites and endometrial cancer. Methods: We extracted metabolite level data from 8,299 participants in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) and conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS). This study involved 1,091 metabolites and 309 metabolite ratios. We utilized the ebi-a-GCST006464 dataset from the GWAS Catalog database for endometrial cancer. This dataset covered the European population, with 12,906 cases of endometrial cancer and 108,979 controls for preliminary analysis. The primary method for causal analysis was the Inverse Variance Weighted (IVW) method, supplemented by M-R-Egger and weighted median analysis. To validate the robustness, heterogeneity, and pleiotropy of the results, we conducted comprehensive sensitivity analyses, including the Cochran Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, radial MR, and leave-one-out analysis. For the final identification of metabolites, we also performed linkage disequilibrium score regression and colocalization analysis. Results: The results of this study indicated significant associations between nine metabolites and endometrial cancer. These include: 5alpha-androstan-3alpha,17beta-diol monosulfate (1) levels (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.15, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.09-1.20, p=1.34×10−8), 5alpha-androstan-3beta,17beta-diol monosulfate (2) levels (OR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.29, p=6.46×10−7), Androstenediol (3beta,17beta) disulfate (1) levels (OR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.12-1.36, p=3.01×10−5), Hexadecanedioate (C16-DC) levels (OR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.19, p=8.43×10−5), 1-linoleoyl-GPG (18:2) levels (OR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.06-1.21, p=0.0001), Adenosine 5'-diphosphate (ADP) to pantothenate ratio (OR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.29, p=0.0001), Octadecenedioylcarnitine (C18:1-DC) levels (OR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.05-1.17, p=0.0001), Glutarate (C5-DC) levels (OR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.28, p=0.0003), X-22509 levels (OR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06-1.24, p=0.0003). Conclusion: The results of this study reveal potential causal relationships between nine circulating metabolites and endometrial cancer, offering new insights into the biological mechanisms of endometrial cancer. These findings, derived from integrating genomics and metabolomics approaches, not only enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of endometrial cancer but also have significant implications for the screening, prevention, and treatment strategies of endometrial cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies→French-language works237,207→