Xinrui Yao, Sitong Dong, Xiao Li, Ouxuan Liu, Yuexin Hu, Yuxuan Wang, Xiangcheng Fan, Bei Lin
{"title":"肠道菌群与子宫内膜癌之间的因果关系:一项双样本孟德尔随机研究。","authors":"Xinrui Yao, Sitong Dong, Xiao Li, Ouxuan Liu, Yuexin Hu, Yuxuan Wang, Xiangcheng Fan, Bei Lin","doi":"10.7150/ijms.112922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several relevant reports have shown that changes in the composition of the gut microbiota are related to the pathogenesis of endometrial cancer (EC). However, the causal effect of the gut microbiota on EC remains unknown. A two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study was used to assess the causal effects of the gut microbiota on EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The genetic statistics of the gut microbiota, including 18,340 participants, were acquired from the MiBioGen database. The summary statistics of EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies were obtained from the publicly available Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) database. Suitable single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected as instrumental variables (IVs) (<i>P</i> < 5×10<sup>-8</sup>, r<sup>2</sup> < 0.001). The causal effects were evaluated via the MR-Egger regression method, the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method, the weighted median test, the weighted mode test, and the simple mode test. The IVW analysis suggested that <i>Ruminococcusgnavusgroup</i> (OR=0.82, 95%CI=0.78-0.85, <i>P</i>=1.29×10<sup>-17</sup>), <i>Euryarchaeota</i> (OR=0.90, 95%CI=0.87-0.94, <i>P</i>=3.78×10<sup>-6</sup>), and <i>CandidatusSoleaferrea</i> (OR=0.92, 95%CI=0.87-0.98, <i>P</i>=0.01) had protective effects on EC and its subtypes. <i>Gammaproteobacteria</i> (OR=1.29, 95%CI=1.19-1.39, <i>P</i>=2.32×10<sup>-10</sup>) served as a risk factor for EC, and <i>Intestinimonas</i> (OR=1.33, 95%CI=1.10-1.62, <i>P</i>=3.68×10<sup>-3</sup>) had detrimental effects on EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The causal relationship between the gut microbiota and EC was explored through two-sample MR analysis, which is helpful for further understanding the gut microbiota-mediated development mechanism underlying EC.</p>","PeriodicalId":14031,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"22 12","pages":"3142-3153"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12244081/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Causal Relationship between Gut Microbiota and Endometrial Cancer: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.\",\"authors\":\"Xinrui Yao, Sitong Dong, Xiao Li, Ouxuan Liu, Yuexin Hu, Yuxuan Wang, Xiangcheng Fan, Bei Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.7150/ijms.112922\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Several relevant reports have shown that changes in the composition of the gut microbiota are related to the pathogenesis of endometrial cancer (EC). However, the causal effect of the gut microbiota on EC remains unknown. A two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study was used to assess the causal effects of the gut microbiota on EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The genetic statistics of the gut microbiota, including 18,340 participants, were acquired from the MiBioGen database. The summary statistics of EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies were obtained from the publicly available Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) database. Suitable single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected as instrumental variables (IVs) (<i>P</i> < 5×10<sup>-8</sup>, r<sup>2</sup> < 0.001). The causal effects were evaluated via the MR-Egger regression method, the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method, the weighted median test, the weighted mode test, and the simple mode test. The IVW analysis suggested that <i>Ruminococcusgnavusgroup</i> (OR=0.82, 95%CI=0.78-0.85, <i>P</i>=1.29×10<sup>-17</sup>), <i>Euryarchaeota</i> (OR=0.90, 95%CI=0.87-0.94, <i>P</i>=3.78×10<sup>-6</sup>), and <i>CandidatusSoleaferrea</i> (OR=0.92, 95%CI=0.87-0.98, <i>P</i>=0.01) had protective effects on EC and its subtypes. <i>Gammaproteobacteria</i> (OR=1.29, 95%CI=1.19-1.39, <i>P</i>=2.32×10<sup>-10</sup>) served as a risk factor for EC, and <i>Intestinimonas</i> (OR=1.33, 95%CI=1.10-1.62, <i>P</i>=3.68×10<sup>-3</sup>) had detrimental effects on EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The causal relationship between the gut microbiota and EC was explored through two-sample MR analysis, which is helpful for further understanding the gut microbiota-mediated development mechanism underlying EC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"22 12\",\"pages\":\"3142-3153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12244081/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.112922\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.112922","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Causal Relationship between Gut Microbiota and Endometrial Cancer: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.
Several relevant reports have shown that changes in the composition of the gut microbiota are related to the pathogenesis of endometrial cancer (EC). However, the causal effect of the gut microbiota on EC remains unknown. A two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study was used to assess the causal effects of the gut microbiota on EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The genetic statistics of the gut microbiota, including 18,340 participants, were acquired from the MiBioGen database. The summary statistics of EC, EC with endometrioid histologies and EC with non-endometrioid histologies were obtained from the publicly available Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) database. Suitable single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected as instrumental variables (IVs) (P < 5×10-8, r2 < 0.001). The causal effects were evaluated via the MR-Egger regression method, the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method, the weighted median test, the weighted mode test, and the simple mode test. The IVW analysis suggested that Ruminococcusgnavusgroup (OR=0.82, 95%CI=0.78-0.85, P=1.29×10-17), Euryarchaeota (OR=0.90, 95%CI=0.87-0.94, P=3.78×10-6), and CandidatusSoleaferrea (OR=0.92, 95%CI=0.87-0.98, P=0.01) had protective effects on EC and its subtypes. Gammaproteobacteria (OR=1.29, 95%CI=1.19-1.39, P=2.32×10-10) served as a risk factor for EC, and Intestinimonas (OR=1.33, 95%CI=1.10-1.62, P=3.68×10-3) had detrimental effects on EC with non-endometrioid histologies. The causal relationship between the gut microbiota and EC was explored through two-sample MR analysis, which is helpful for further understanding the gut microbiota-mediated development mechanism underlying EC.
期刊介绍:
Original research papers, reviews, and short research communications in any medical related area can be submitted to the Journal on the understanding that the work has not been published previously in whole or part and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Manuscripts in basic science and clinical medicine are both considered. There is no restriction on the length of research papers and reviews, although authors are encouraged to be concise. Short research communication is limited to be under 2500 words.