ArticleDiscover oncology2025
The relationship between cathepsins and nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a Mendelian randomization analysis.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundObservational studies have shown the potential for cathepsins (CTS) to have an effect on nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), but their conclusions are susceptible to confounding factors.
methodsTo investigate the causal relationship between CTS and NPC, Mendelian randomization (MR) was conducted. Genetic data for nine CTS (CTS B, E, F, G, H, L2, O, S and Z) was obtained from a genome-wide association study. As the data on outcome, genetic data of NPC was utilized from a FinnGen study. MR was performed using five analytical methods including Inverse Variance-Weighted (IVW) method, MR-Egger test, Weighted Median test, Simple Mode test and Weighted Mode test, with the IVW as the main analysis method. Cochran's Q test, MR-PRESSO global test and "leave-one-out" sensitivity test were used in sensitivity analysis. Reverse MR was performed to investigate whether there is reverse causality between NPC and CTS. MR Steiger test was used to determine the direction of the interaction between CTS and NPC.
resultsOverall, the authors found favorable evidence to support the association between Cathepsin F (CTSF) and NPC. CTSF was associated to increase the risk of NPC (odds ratio [OR] = 1.845, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.086 ~ 3.136, P = 0.024) according to IVW. The results proved to be stable and robust in the sensitivity analysis. In the Steiger test, the causal effect of CTS on NPC was shown to be unidirectional.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that CTSF may plays an important role in NPC thus providing new research ideas for future basic research endeavors and clinical applications.
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.