ArticleScientific reports2025
Causal association between cathepsins and asthma: a Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identifying Therapeutic Targets for Bronchial Asthma: Systematic Druggable Genome-Wide Mendelian Randomization.Health science reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Asthma, a chronic respiratory disease affecting millions worldwide, poses a significant public health burden. Cathepsins, a group of proteolytic enzymes, have recently been implicated in asthma pathophysiology, though their exact causal role remains unclear. To address this gap, we conducted univariate and multivariate Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses using data from the INTERVAL study (3301 European ancestry participants) and FinnGen consortium (46,684 asthma cases and 219,734 controls). Our analysis employed inverse variance weighting (IVW), median weighting, and MR-Egger regression to ensure robustness and explore causality from multiple perspectives. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess heterogeneity and pleiotropy.Results indicated a significant association between elevated cathepsin L2 levels and increased asthma risk (OR 1.058, 95% CI 1.016-1.101, P = 0.006), suggesting a potential role of cathepsin L2 in asthma pathogenesis. No significant effect of asthma status on cathepsin L2 levels was observed (P = 0.550), ruling out reverse causality. Multivariable MR further confirmed the independent association of cathepsin L2 with asthma risk. Sensitivity analyses supported these findings with no evidence of significant pleiotropy.This study is the first to apply Mendelian randomization to explore the causal relationship between cathepsins and asthma, highlighting cathepsin L2 as a key player in asthma pathophysiology. These findings offer novel insights into asthma mechanisms and suggest cathepsin L2 as a potential therapeutic target warranting further investigation.
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.