ArticleInternational journal of women's health2025
Identification of Novel Disease-Modifying Agents for Pelvic Organ Prolapse by Systematic Druggable Genome-Wide Mendelian Randomization.
Article in International journal of women's health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) present a significant global health burden, yet effective therapeutic targets remain limited. This study aims to identify potential disease-modifying agents for POP and provide insights to guide the development of targeted therapeutics. Methods: We integrated data from the druggable genome and expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) with genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and employed Mendelian randomisation (MR) alongside colocalization analysis to identify potential therapeutic targets. To further elucidate the biological relevance of the identified targets, we performed functional enrichment analyses, including the construction of protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks, Gene Ontology (GO) annotations, and KEGG pathway analysis. Key candidate genes were subsequently evaluated using phenome-wide MR (Phe-MR) to investigate potential adverse effects of these druggable genes on POP treatment. Results: From two druggable gene sets, two QTLs datasets, four different tissues, and two large-scale POP GWAS datasets, we identified 23 positive targets and 5 druggable genes, including ESR1, DES, and SLC12A2 for whole blood and two tissue-specific genes (ADAMTS5 and PCOLCE2). Enrichment analysis highlighted biological processes involving vagina development, glycosaminoglycan binding, and sulfur compound binding. Phe-MR analysis indicated no significant adverse effects for most genes, except for ESR1 and DES. Conclusion: This study investigates the biological roles of potential drug targets for POP, identifying promising candidates for future research and drug development in POP treatment.
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.