ArticleScientific reports2024
Genetic evidence supporting potential causal roles of EIF4 family in breast cancer: a two-sample randomized Mendelian study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Targeting RNA binding proteins with small-molecule inhibitors: Advances, challenges, and therapeutic opportunities.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Review
- Decoding ARF4 and EIF5B-Based Prognostic Signatures and Immune Landscape Following Insufficient Radiofrequency Ablation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Through Multi-Omics and Experimental Validation.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Translational control plays a crucial role in the regulation of apoptosis, with the EIF4 family serving as one of the mRNA translation factors that modulate the process of mRNA translation based on mRNA characteristics. To address this potential causal role of EIF4 family proteins and breast cancer, Mendelian randomization was employed. The study incorporated four sets of genetics instrumental variables, namely EIF4E, EIF4B, EIF4A, and EIF4EBP2. The outcome variables selected for analysis were the BCAC consortium, which included estrogen receptor positive (ER+) and estrogen receptor negative (ER-) samples. To assess the potential violations of the MR assumption, the primary MR analysis employed inverse variance weighted (IVW), and several sensitivity analyses were conducted. The findings of the two-sample MR analysis indicate that EIF4E has an adverse effect on breast cancer risk (p = 0.028). However, the evidence for the relationship between EIF4E and ER status of breast cancer suggests a weak association with ER+ breast cancer (p = 0.054), but not with ER- breast cancer (p > 0.05). The study findings indicate that EIF4A is not causally linked to the risk of ER+ breast cancer, but is significantly associated with an elevated risk of ER- breast cancer (p = 0.028). However, the evidence is inadequate to support the effects of EIF4B and EIF4EBP2 on breast cancer (p > 0.05). Our results suggest that EIF4 may be a potential factor in the occurrence and development of breast cancer, which may lead to a better understanding of its causes and prevention.
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.