ArticleDiscover oncology2025
The role of preeclampsia in breast cancer risk: insights from Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Discover oncology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between preeclampsia and breast cancer risk is still debated, with observational studies yielding inconsistent results. This research aims to clarify the causal link between preeclampsia and breast cancer using Mendelian randomization (MR) methods.
methodsWe utilized genome-wide association study (GWAS) data to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are significantly associated with preeclampsia, which served as genetic instruments. A two-sample Mendelian randomization (TSMR) approach was applied, primarily using inverse variance weighting (IVW) to assess the causal impact of preeclampsia on breast cancer risk. To strengthen our findings, a meta-analysis of IVW estimates from both discovery and validation cohorts was performed, complemented by sensitivity analyses to investigate heterogeneity and potential horizontal pleiotropy.
resultsIn the discovery cohort, IVW analysis revealed a potential inverse relationship between preeclampsia and breast cancer risk (OR, 0.971; 95% CI, 0.947-0.996; P = 0.022). However, the validation cohort did not demonstrate a significant causal association (OR, 0.992; 95% CI, 0.975-1.008; P = 0.327). The combined meta-analysis indicated that preeclampsia might be linked to a lower risk of breast cancer (OR, 0.986; 95% CI, 0.972-0.999; P = 0.041). In subgroup analysis, preeclampsia was found to have a potential association only with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer (OR, 0.956; 95% CI, 0.916-0.999; P = 0.043), while no significant link was observed with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (OR, 0.972; 95% CI, 0.945-1.000; P = 0.051). Sensitivity analyses indicated no significant heterogeneity or evidence of horizontal pleiotropy (P > 0.05).
conclusionThis MR study, supported by a robust meta-analysis, suggests that preeclampsia may have a protective effect against breast cancer, especially ER-negative breast cancer. However, to firmly establish this relationship, additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted. Moreover, further exploration of the biological mechanisms underlying this potential association is needed through both in vitro and in vivo research.
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.