Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39473890›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024

Investigating the causal relationship between human blood metabolites and pulmonary hypertension: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.

Xingdu Zeng, Bin Zhong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xingdu ZengDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou, Jiangxi, China.
Bin ZhongDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou, Jiangxi, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several recent investigations have posited that distinct metabolites in the bloodstream may be correlated with the pathogenesis of Pulmonary Hypertension (PH). Nonetheless, the interrelationship between the pathogenesis of PH and metabolite fluctuations remains incompletely elucidated, and findings may differ across studies. Methods: In the extant research, data from 486 metabolite-and PH-related genetic variants in human subjects were procured based on Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) and Finnish databases. Univariate Mendelian Randomization analyses were deployed to evaluate the causal relationships between them. The utilization of the randomized Inverse Variance weighted(IVW) method served as the primary analytic framework in this Mendelian Randomization (MR) study. Additionally, four alternative computational strategies, encompassing MR-Egger, were employed as auxiliary methods. A myriad of tests, including Cochran's Q Test, MR-Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO, leave-one-out analysis, and linkage disequilibrium score were incorporated to assess the robustness of the study outcomes. Metabolite pathway analysis was also executed to identify potential metabolic pathways. Results: After a series of validations and corrected for False discovery rate (FDR), we found a significant association between 1,5-anhydroglucitol (OR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.39-2.89, Conclusion: Conclusively, we isolated 1,5-anhydroglucitol, 1-arachidonoylglycerophosphocholine, and pyridoxate as causally implicated in PH, thereby proffering substantial theoretical substantiation for the formulation of future PH prevention and screening paradigms.

Indexed as

causal inferenceinstrumental variablesMendelian randomizationpulmonary hypertensionserological metabolites

Identifiers

PMID39473890
PMCPMC11518716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.