ArticlePloS one2020
Blood pressure and bladder cancer risk in men by use of survival analysis and in interaction with NAT2 genotype, and by Mendelian randomization analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tolerability and efficacy of induction Bacillus Calmette-Guérin for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.) · 2025Article
- Interaction between blood pressure and genetic risk score for bladder cancer, and risk of urothelial carcinoma in men.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Association of Hypertension and Organ-Specific Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A Comparative Study of the Triglycerides/HDL Ratio and Pseudocholinesterase Levels in Patients with Bladder Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The association between blood pressure (BP) and bladder cancer (BC) risk remains unclear with confounding by smoking being of particular concern. We investigated the association between BP and BC risk among men using conventional survival-analysis, and by Mendelian Randomization (MR) analysis in an attempt to disconnect the association from smoking. We additionally investigated the interaction between BP and N-acetyltransferase-2 (NAT2) rs1495741, an established BC genetic risk variant, in the association. Populations consisting of 188,167 men with 502 incident BC's in the UK-biobank and 27,107 men with 928 incident BC's in two Swedish cohorts were used for the analysis. We found a positive association between systolic BP and BC risk in Cox-regression survival analysis in the Swedish cohorts, (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation [SD]: 1.14 [95% confidence interval 1.05-1.22]) and MR analysis (odds ratio per SD: 2-stage least-square regression, 7.70 [1.92-30.9]; inverse-variance weighted estimate, 3.43 [1.12-10.5]), and no associations in the UK-biobank (HR systolic BP: 0.93 [0.85-1.02]; MR OR: 1.24 [0.35-4.40] and 1.37 [0.43-4.37], respectively). BP levels were positively associated with muscle-invasive BC (MIBC) (HRs: systolic BP, 1.32 [1.09-1.59]; diastolic BP, 1.27 [1.04-1.55]), but not with non-muscle invasive BC, which could be analyzed in the Swedish cohorts only. There was no interaction between BP and NAT2 in relation to BC on the additive or multiplicative scale. These results suggest that BP might be related to BC, more particularly MIBC. There was no evidence to support interaction between BP and NAT2 in relation to BC in our study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.