ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2026
Genetic prediction of blood cell reactivity and its potential causal influence on bone continuity and density disorders.
Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate the potential causal relationship between genetically predicted human blood cell (HBC) reactivity and disorders of bone continuity, density, and structure.
methodsWe analyzed summary-level GWAS data for 91 HBC traits and two bone-related outcomes from publicly available sources, employing the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method as the principal Mendelian randomization (MR) technique. The sensitivity analyses comprised MR-Egger regression and MR-PRESSO.
resultsMR analysis identified suggestive associations between red blood cell (RBC) perturbation response (Pam3CSK4), neutrophil perturbation response (side fluorescence coefficient of variation of neutrophil 4), Neutrophil perturbation response (colchicine), Monocyte perturbation response (TMAO perturbation) and bone continuity. The MR results are: [β: -0.13, odds ratio (OR): 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77, 0.99; p = 0.040], [β: 0.11, OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.23; p = 0.016], [β: -0.11, OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81, 0.99; p = 0.029] and [β: -0.04, OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92, 0.99; p = 0.023]. In addition, Neutrophil perturbation response (forward scatter median of neutrophil 1), Unknown cell population perturbation response (nigericin) and other disorders of bone density and structure are also potential causal factors, with MR Result [β: 0.21, OR: 1.24, 95%CI: 1.01, 1.51; p = 0.034], [β: 0.03, OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.06; p = 0.042]. Reverse Mendelian randomization sensitivity analysis showed a potential bidirectional association between specific HBC features and bone-related outcomes.
conclusionsThis exploratory study offer valuable preliminary insights into the blood cell functional reactivity and bone health. The findings, while requiring independent validation, highlight plausible biological pathways for further elucidation.
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.