ArticleJournal of ovarian research2025
Exploring causal relationships between brain imaging-derived phenotypes and ovarian cancer risk: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Imaging-mediated genetic effects link brain microstructure, metabolic profiles, and regional transcription to glioma susceptibility.Frontiers in immunology · 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
backgroundOvarian cancer could induce alterations in both structure and function of the brain. This study employs Mendelian randomization (MR) to investigate the causal relationship between brain imaging-derived phenotypes (IDPs) and ovarian cancer, offering new insights into the potential clinical applications of IDPs for ovarian cancer risk assessment.
methodsThis study identified 587 brain IDPs using structural and diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data from the UK Biobank and data were sourced from two independent Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS). We selected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as instrumental variables based on rigorous criteria. To evaluate the causal effects of IDPs on the risk of ovarian cancer, we employed five MR models: Inverse Variance Weighted (IVW), MR-Egger regression, Weighted median, Weighted mode, and Simple mode. Furthermore, we conducted a meta-analysis to provide additional validation for our results.
resultsForward MR analysis identified 72 IDPs that were significantly associated with the risk of ovarian cancer, with 65 remaining robust after conducting sensitivity tests. Conversely, reverse MR analysis indicated that 63 IDPs were influenced by ovarian cancer, highlighting a bidirectional causal relationship between these factors. The meta-analysis revealed that an increased cortical surface area of the right precentral gyrus was associated with a heightened risk of ovarian cancer, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.139 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.037-1.250, P = 0.006, common effect model). In contrast, a larger volume of the right medial orbital frontal cortex was linked to a reduced risk of ovarian cancer, with an OR of 0.839 (95% CI: 0.744-0.946, P = 0.004, common effect model). Additionally, in the reverse MR analysis, a higher risk of ovarian cancer was associated with an increased fractional anisotropy (FA) in the right fornix and stria terminalis, while decreased orientation dispersion index (OD) in the left anterior corona radiata.
conclusionsThis study provides compelling evidence of a causal relationship between IDPs and ovarian cancer risk. It suggests that IDPs might serve as valuable biomarkers for ovarian cancer risk assessment at brain-imaging levels and emphasize the need for further research to explore the biological mechanisms underlying these associations.
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.