ArticleAging2024
Eosinophils and drugs for eosinophilia are associated with the risk of colorectal cancer: a Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eosinophils in solid cancers: sentinels, predictors, and therapeutic allies.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2026Review
- Sex differences in innate immune cell responses: Impact on cancer immunity and response to therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Eosinophils have the potential to exhibit both anti-tumor properties and tumor-promoting effects. However, the impact of eosinophil levels in the bloodstream on tumorigenesis risk remains inadequately explored. Furthermore, investigations regarding the association between drugs regulating eosinophils and cancer risk are currently absent. In this study, we conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis utilizing eosinophil count and eosinophil percentage as exposures. In both cohorts, a significant association was observed between eosinophil count and the risk of colorectal cancer and skin malignancies. However, upon conducting a sensitivity analysis, heterogeneity was detected specifically in relation to skin malignancies. Subsequent reverse Mendelian randomization analysis did not indicate any evidence of reverse causality. Furthermore, the multivariate Mendelian randomization analysis results suggested that eosinophils act as a mediating factor in reducing the risk of colorectal cancer and skin malignancies in individuals with asthma. And the use of drugs that modulate eosinophilia may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. It is evident that the statistical evidence supporting a negative correlation between eosinophils count and the susceptibility to colorectal cancer is particularly robust. And, it is plausible to suggest that pharmaceutical interventions aimed at modulating eosinophilia may potentially heighten the risk of colorectal cancer. Hence, it is imperative to exercise caution and remain mindful of the potential risk of colorectal cancer when employing these medications.
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.