ArticleFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2021
Genome-Wide Association Study of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Using the Michigan Genomics Initiative.
Article in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chapter 4.5: New Proposed Treatments for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- Developing a polygenic risk score for pelvic organ prolapse: a combined risk assessment approach in Chinese women.Frontiers of medicine · 2025Article
- Unveiling the depths of pelvic organ prolapse: From risk factors to therapeutic methods (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Review
- Review
- Genetics of Female Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Up to Date.Biomolecules · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to (1) replicate previously identified genetic variants significantly associated with pelvic organ prolapse and (2) identify new genetic variants associated with pelvic organ prolapse using a genome-wide association study.
methodsUsing our institution's database linking genetic and clinical data, we identified 1,329 women of European ancestry with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)/ICD-10 code for prolapse, 767 of whom also had Current Procedural Terminology (CPT)/ICD-9/ICD-10 procedure codes for prolapse surgery, and 16,383 women of European ancestry older than 40 years without a prolapse diagnosis code as controls. Patients were genotyped using the Illumina HumanCoreExome chip and imputed to the Haplotype Reference Consortium. We tested 20 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for association with pelvic organ prolapse adjusting for relatedness, age, chip version, and 4 principal components. We compared our results with 18 previously identified genome-wide significant SNPs from the UK Biobank, Commun Biol (2020;3:129), and Obstet Gynecol (2011;118:1345-1353).
resultsNo variants achieved genome-wide significance (P = 5 × 10-8). However, we replicated 4 SNPs with biologic plausibility at nominal significance (P ≤ 0.05): rs12325192 (P = 0.002), rs9306894 (P = 0.05), rs1920568 (P = 0.034), and rs1247943 (P = 0.041), which were all intergenic and nearest the genes SALL1, GDF7, TBX5, and TBX5, respectively.
conclusionsOur replication of 4 biologically plausible previously reported SNPs provides further evidence for a genetic contribution to prolapse, specifically that rs12325192, rs9306894, rs1920568, and rs1247943 may contribute to susceptibility for prolapse. These and previously reported associations that have not yet been replicated should be further explored in larger, more diverse cohorts, perhaps through meta-analysis.
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.