Association between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and risk of breast and gynecological cancers: Evidence from meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study

IF 1 4区生物学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY

Annals of Human Genetics Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.1111/ahg.12573

Jing Peng, Lianghua Li, Huai Ning, Xiaocheng Li

{"title":"Association between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and risk of breast and gynecological cancers: Evidence from meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study","authors":"Jing Peng, Lianghua Li, Huai Ning, Xiaocheng Li","doi":"10.1111/ahg.12573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Observational studies have shown that cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy are associated with the risk of breast cancer (BC) and gynecological cancers, but whether these relationships are causal has not been established and remains controversial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Our study began with a meta-analysis that synthesized data from prior observational studies to examine the association between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of BC and gynecological cancers. Subsequently, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted utilizing genetic variant data to investigate the potential causal relationship between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the aforementioned cancers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated a significant association between cholecystectomy and the risk of BC (risk ratio [RR] = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.06, <i>p</i> = 0.002) and endometrial cancer (EC) (RR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.02–1.56, <i>p</i> = 0.031). Conversely, no significant association was observed between cholelithiasis and the risk of BC, EC, and ovarian cancer. The MR analysis revealed no discernible causal connection between cholelithiasis and overall BC (<i>p</i> = 0.053), as well as BC subtypes (including estrogen receptor-positive/negative). Similarly, there was no causal effect of cholecystectomy on BC risk (<i>p</i> = 0.399) and its subtypes. Furthermore, no causal associations were identified between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of gynecological cancers (ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer [CC]) (all <i>p</i> > 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study does not support a causal link between cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy and an increased risk of female cancers such as breast, endometrial, ovarian, and CC.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":8085,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Human Genetics","volume":"88 6","pages":"423-435"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Human Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ahg.12573","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Observational studies have shown that cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy are associated with the risk of breast cancer (BC) and gynecological cancers, but whether these relationships are causal has not been established and remains controversial.

Methods

Our study began with a meta-analysis that synthesized data from prior observational studies to examine the association between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of BC and gynecological cancers. Subsequently, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted utilizing genetic variant data to investigate the potential causal relationship between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the aforementioned cancers.

Results

The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated a significant association between cholecystectomy and the risk of BC (risk ratio [RR] = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.06, p = 0.002) and endometrial cancer (EC) (RR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.02–1.56, p = 0.031). Conversely, no significant association was observed between cholelithiasis and the risk of BC, EC, and ovarian cancer. The MR analysis revealed no discernible causal connection between cholelithiasis and overall BC (p = 0.053), as well as BC subtypes (including estrogen receptor-positive/negative). Similarly, there was no causal effect of cholecystectomy on BC risk (p = 0.399) and its subtypes. Furthermore, no causal associations were identified between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of gynecological cancers (ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer [CC]) (all p > 0.05).

Conclusion

This study does not support a causal link between cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy and an increased risk of female cancers such as breast, endometrial, ovarian, and CC.

查看原文本刊更多论文

胆石症、胆囊切除术与乳腺癌和妇科癌症风险之间的关系：来自荟萃分析和孟德尔随机研究的证据。

背景：观察性研究表明，胆石症和胆囊切除术与乳腺癌（BC）和妇科癌症的风险有关，但这些关系是否是因果关系尚未确定，仍存在争议：我们的研究首先进行了一项荟萃分析，综合了之前观察性研究的数据，以研究胆石症、胆囊切除术与乳腺癌和妇科癌症风险之间的关系。随后，利用基因变异数据进行了双样本孟德尔随机化（MR）分析，以研究胆石症、胆囊切除术与上述癌症之间的潜在因果关系：荟萃分析结果表明，胆囊切除术与 BC（风险比 [RR] = 1.04，95% 置信区间 [CI]：1.01-1.06，P = 0.002）和子宫内膜癌（EC）（RR = 1.26，95% 置信区间 [CI]：1.02-1.56，P = 0.031）风险之间存在显著关联。相反，在胆石症与 BC、EC 和卵巢癌风险之间没有观察到明显的关联。MR分析显示，胆石症与总体BC（p = 0.053）以及BC亚型（包括雌激素受体阳性/阴性）之间没有明显的因果关系。同样，胆囊切除术对乳腺癌风险（p = 0.399）及其亚型也没有因果关系。此外，未发现胆石症、胆囊切除术与妇科癌症（卵巢癌、子宫内膜癌和宫颈癌 [CC]）风险之间存在因果关系（所有 p > 0.05）：本研究不支持胆石症和胆囊切除术与乳腺癌、子宫内膜癌、卵巢癌和宫颈癌等女性癌症风险增加之间存在因果关系。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Annals of Human Genetics 生物-遗传学

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Annals of Human Genetics publishes material directly concerned with human genetics or the application of scientific principles and techniques to any aspect of human inheritance. Papers that describe work on other species that may be relevant to human genetics will also be considered. Mathematical models should include examples of application to data where possible. Authors are welcome to submit Supporting Information, such as data sets or additional figures or tables, that will not be published in the print edition of the journal, but which will be viewable via the online edition and stored on the website.