ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2022
Review of Mendelian Randomization Studies on Endometrial Cancer.
Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Indirect Roles of Immunophenotypes in the Association Between Glycerophospholipid Metabolism and Endometrial Cancer Risk: A Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Association Between Educational Attainment and the Risk of Gynecological Malignancies: A Mediation Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- A metabolic marker-based diagnostic model for precancerous and malignant endometrial lesions in insulin-resistant PCOS women with sonographically suspected endometrial polyps.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Age at menarche is inversely related to the prevalence of uterine cancer.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Exploring the Potential Causal Relationship of Galectin Levels and Gynecologic Cancers: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Observational
- Evaluation of Risk Factors Related to Ovarian Involvement in Endometrial Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Study.Galen medical journal · 2024Article
- Validity of self-assessment pubertal Tanner stages by realistic color images and Pubertal Development Scale in a longitudinal cohort study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Causal Associations of Environmental Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.Global heart · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Endometrial Cancer: A Monocentric Retrospective Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Celiac Disease Is a Risk Factor for Mature T and NK Cell Lymphoma: A Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Prognostic factors and survival of patients with endometrial cancer: A 10-year retrospective cohort study in a tertiary referral center in Northern Taiwan.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometrial cancer (EC) is a common gynecological cancer. In some parts of the world, the incidence and mortality of EC are on the rise. Understanding the risk factors of EC is necessary to prevent the occurrence of this disease. Observational studies have revealed the association between certain modifiable environmental risk factors and EC risk. However, due to unmeasured confounding, measurement errors, and reverse causality, observational studies sometimes have limited ability to judge robust causal inferences. In recent years, Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis has received extensive attention, providing valuable insights for cancer-related research, and is expected to identify potential therapeutic interventions. In MR analysis, genetic variation (alleles are randomly assigned during meiosis and are usually independent of environmental or lifestyle factors) is used instead of modifiable exposure to study the relationship between risk factors and disease. Therefore, MR analysis can make causal inference about exposure and disease risk. This review briefly describes the key principles and assumptions of MR analysis; summarizes published MR studies on EC; focuses on the correlation between different risk factors and EC risks; and discusses the application of MR methods in EC research. The results of MR studies on EC showed that type 2 diabetes, uterine fibroids, higher body mass index, higher plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), higher fasting insulin, early insulin secretion, longer telomere length, higher testosterone and higher plasma cortisol levels are associated with increased risk of EC. In contrast, later age of menarche, higher circulatory tumor necrosis factor, higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and higher sex hormone-binding globulin levels are associated with reduced risk of EC. In general, despite some limitations, MR analysis still provides an effective way to explore the causal relationship between different risk factors and EC.
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.