ArticlePloS one2021
Identifying modifiable risk factors of lung cancer: Indications from Mendelian randomization.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alcohol consumption and its association with cancer, cardiovascular, liver and brain diseases: a systematic review of Mendelian randomization studies.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2024Pooled it
- The evolving disease burden of lung cancer (2014-2023) in Qingdao, China: An observational trend study with projections.Medicine · 2026Observational
- The association between white blood cell count and relative risk of non-small cell lung cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Factors Influencing the Lung Cancer Incidence in China: A Meta-Analysis.Florence Nightingale journal of nursing · 2024Article
- Mendelian randomization analyses explore the relationship between cathepsins and lung cancer.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer is the major cause of mortality in tumor patients. While its incidence rate has recently declined, it is still far from satisfactory and its potential modifiable risk factors should be explored.
methodsWe performed a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to investigate the causal relationship between potentially modifiable risk factors (namely smoking behavior, alcohol intake, anthropometric traits, blood pressure, lipidemic traits, glycemic traits, and fasting insulin) and lung cancer. Besides, a bi-directional MR analysis was carried out to disentangle the complex relationship between different risk factors. Inverse-variance weighted (IVW) was utilized to combine the estimation for each SNP. Cochrane's Q value was used to evaluate heterogeneity and two methods, including MR-Egger intercept and MR-PRESSO, were adopted to detect horizontal pleiotropy.
resultsThree kinds of smoking behavior were all causally associated with lung cancer. Overall, smokers were more likely to suffer from lung cancer compared with non-smokers (OR = 2.58 [1.95, 3.40], p-value = 2.07 x 10-11), and quitting smoking could reduce the risk (OR = 4.29[2.60, 7.07], p-value = 1.23 x 10-8). Furthermore, we found a dose-response relationship between the number of cigarettes and lung cancer (OR = 6.10 [5.35, 6.96], p-value = 4.43x10-161). Lower HDL cholesterol could marginally increase the risk of lung cancer, but become insignificant after Bonferroni correction (OR = 0.82 [0.68, 1.00], p-value = 0.045). In addition, we noted no direct causal relationship between other risk factors and lung cancer. Neither heterogeneity nor pleiotropy was observed in this study. However, when treating the smoking behavior as the outcome, we found the increased BMI could elevate the number of cigarettes per day (beta = 0.139[0.104, 0.175], p-value = 1.99x10-14) and a similar effect was observed for the waist circumference and hip circumference. Additionally, the elevation of SBP could also marginally increase the number of cigarettes per day (beta = 0.001 [0.0002, 0.002], p-value = 0.018).
conclusionSmoking behavior might be the most direct and effective modifiable way to reduce the risk of lung cancer. Meanwhile, smoking behavior can be affected by other risk factors, especially obesity.
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.