ArticlePloS one2025
Genetic evidence for amlodipine's protective role in gastroesophageal reflux disease: A focus on CACNB2.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThis study aims to elucidate the causal relationship between genetically predicted amlodipine use and the risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) using a bidirectional Mendelian Randomization (MR) approach and to explore the underlying genetic and molecular mechanisms through functional enrichment analysis and the construction of a competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) network.
methodsPublicly available GWAS datasets from the Neale Lab consortium were used, including data on amlodipine (13,693 cases, 323,466 controls) and GERD (14,316 cases, 322,843 controls). Genome-wide significant SNPs were selected as instrumental variables and clustered by linkage disequilibrium. MR analysis was conducted using R software with all five methods. Sensitivity analyses assessed pleiotropy and heterogeneity. Drug target genes were analyzed using GO and KEGG pathways. GeneMANIA was used for network visualization, and a ceRNA network was constructed with Cytoscape. Differential gene expression analysis on GERD-related datasets from GEO validated the findings.
resultsThe MR analysis indicated a significant negative association between genetically predicted amlodipine use and GERD risk (IVW OR = 0.872, 95% CI = 0.812-0.937, P = 0.0002). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, showing no evidence of pleiotropy or heterogeneity. The enrichment analysis identified key biological processes and pathways involving calcium ion transport and signaling. The ceRNA network highlighted core targets such as CACNB2, which were further validated by differential expression analysis intersecting drug target genes with GERD-related gene expression changes.
conclusionThis study provides robust evidence of a protective effect of amlodipine against GERD, supported by genetic and molecular analyses. The findings suggest that calcium channel blockers like amlodipine could be repurposed for GERD treatment. The identification of CACNB2 and other core targets in the ceRNA network offers novel insights into the pathophysiology of GERD and potential therapeutic targets, paving the way for personalized medicine approaches to improve patient outcomes.
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.