111614
论文已发表
注册即可获取德孚的最新动态
IF 收录期刊
- 3.4 Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)
- 3.2 Clin Epidemiol
- 2.6 Cancer Manag Res
- 2.9 Infect Drug Resist
- 3.7 Clin Interv Aging
- 5.1 Drug Des Dev Ther
- 3.1 Int J Chronic Obstr
- 6.6 Int J Nanomed
- 2.6 Int J Women's Health
- 2.9 Neuropsych Dis Treat
- 2.8 OncoTargets Ther
- 2.0 Patient Prefer Adher
- 2.2 Ther Clin Risk Manag
- 2.5 J Pain Res
- 3.0 Diabet Metab Synd Ob
- 3.2 Psychol Res Behav Ma
- 3.4 Nat Sci Sleep
- 1.8 Pharmgenomics Pers Med
- 2.0 Risk Manag Healthc Policy
- 4.1 J Inflamm Res
- 2.0 Int J Gen Med
- 3.4 J Hepatocell Carcinoma
- 3.0 J Asthma Allergy
- 2.2 Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol
- 2.4 J Multidiscip Healthc
已发表论文
半乳糖凝集素水平与妇科癌症潜在因果关系的探索：一项两样本孟德尔随机化研究
Authors Dong H, Nie S, Ni N, Guo L, Liu Q
Received 5 January 2025
Accepted for publication 3 November 2025
Published 2 December 2025 Volume 2025:17 Pages 5017—5034
DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S515826
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Vinay Kumar
Hongguo Dong,* Sipei Nie,* Na Ni, Ling Guo, Qiaoling Liu
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211100, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Correspondence: Qiaoling Liu, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China, Email 2512217932@qq.com
Background: Previous studies have reported the correlation between single galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. The present study used the Mendelian randomization (MR) technique to evaluate the causal relationship between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers.
Methods: Data on galectin levels (3394 individuals of the Gal-3 dataset, 3301 individuals of Gal-1, Gal-2, Gal-4, Gal-7, Gal-8, Gal-9, and Gal-10 datasets) and gynecologic cancers were obtained from the IEU Open genome-wide association study (GWAS) project, Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) and FinnGen consortium. Two-sample MR was performed to determine the causal relationship between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. Meanwhile, a bi-directional MR analysis was also conducted to examine the direction of the causal relations. The results were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Gal-3 (OR=1.001, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.001) and Gal-8 (OR=1.001, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.002) may indicate small effects on cervical cancer. Gal-1 was suggested as risk factors for ovarian cancer (OR=1.108, 95% CI: 1.033– 1.188), high grade serous ovarian cancer (OR=1.106, 95% CI: 1.019– 1.202), and invasive mucinous ovarian cancer (OR=1.279, 95% CI: 1.041– 1.573). Gal-9 showed modest effect in ovarian cancer (OR=1.070, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.144), but significantly associated with an elevated risk of mucinous ovarian cancer (OR=1.242, 95% CI: 1.015– 1.520). Gal-10 was suggested as a protective factor against ovarian cancer (OR=0.929, 95% CI: 0.867– 0.994) and clear cell ovarian cancer (OR=0.803, 95% CI: 0.653– 0.987). Gal-2 (OR=0.779, 95% CI: 0.654– 0.929) and Gal-4 (OR=0.786, 95% CI: 0.639– 0.966) were found as protective factors for malignant neoplasm of corpus uteri. Gal-2 (OR=0.921, 95% CI: 0.851– 0.997) and Gal-10 (OR=0.892, 95% CI: 0.815– 0.977) were suggested as protective factors against endometrial cancer (endometrioid histology). Similarly, higher Gal-4 was also associated with decreased risk of endometrial cancer (OR=0.902, 95% CI: 0.840– 0.969) and endometrial cancer (endometrioid histology) (OR=0.846, 95% CI: 0.778– 0.920).
Conclusion: The study explored potential causal relationships between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. While some associations were modest, the consistent directionality across sensitivity analyses and the biological plausibility of galectins in tumor immunology suggest that these proteins warrant further investigation as potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Future research should validate these findings in clinical cohorts and explore underlying mechanisms.
Keywords: galectin, gynecologic cancers, risk factor, protective factor, Mendelian randomization
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211100, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Correspondence: Qiaoling Liu, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China, Email 2512217932@qq.com
Background: Previous studies have reported the correlation between single galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. The present study used the Mendelian randomization (MR) technique to evaluate the causal relationship between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers.
Methods: Data on galectin levels (3394 individuals of the Gal-3 dataset, 3301 individuals of Gal-1, Gal-2, Gal-4, Gal-7, Gal-8, Gal-9, and Gal-10 datasets) and gynecologic cancers were obtained from the IEU Open genome-wide association study (GWAS) project, Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC) and FinnGen consortium. Two-sample MR was performed to determine the causal relationship between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. Meanwhile, a bi-directional MR analysis was also conducted to examine the direction of the causal relations. The results were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Gal-3 (OR=1.001, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.001) and Gal-8 (OR=1.001, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.002) may indicate small effects on cervical cancer. Gal-1 was suggested as risk factors for ovarian cancer (OR=1.108, 95% CI: 1.033– 1.188), high grade serous ovarian cancer (OR=1.106, 95% CI: 1.019– 1.202), and invasive mucinous ovarian cancer (OR=1.279, 95% CI: 1.041– 1.573). Gal-9 showed modest effect in ovarian cancer (OR=1.070, 95% CI: 1.000– 1.144), but significantly associated with an elevated risk of mucinous ovarian cancer (OR=1.242, 95% CI: 1.015– 1.520). Gal-10 was suggested as a protective factor against ovarian cancer (OR=0.929, 95% CI: 0.867– 0.994) and clear cell ovarian cancer (OR=0.803, 95% CI: 0.653– 0.987). Gal-2 (OR=0.779, 95% CI: 0.654– 0.929) and Gal-4 (OR=0.786, 95% CI: 0.639– 0.966) were found as protective factors for malignant neoplasm of corpus uteri. Gal-2 (OR=0.921, 95% CI: 0.851– 0.997) and Gal-10 (OR=0.892, 95% CI: 0.815– 0.977) were suggested as protective factors against endometrial cancer (endometrioid histology). Similarly, higher Gal-4 was also associated with decreased risk of endometrial cancer (OR=0.902, 95% CI: 0.840– 0.969) and endometrial cancer (endometrioid histology) (OR=0.846, 95% CI: 0.778– 0.920).
Conclusion: The study explored potential causal relationships between galectin levels and gynecologic cancers. While some associations were modest, the consistent directionality across sensitivity analyses and the biological plausibility of galectins in tumor immunology suggest that these proteins warrant further investigation as potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Future research should validate these findings in clinical cohorts and explore underlying mechanisms.
Keywords: galectin, gynecologic cancers, risk factor, protective factor, Mendelian randomization