4.6 Article

Ankylosing Spondylitis and the Risk of Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Mendelian Randomization

期刊

FRONTIERS IN GENETICS
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.861984

关键词

lung cancer; ankylosing spondylitis; causality; Mendelian randomization; meta-analysis

资金

  1. Cultivation of Guangdong College Students' Scientific and Technological Innovation (Climbing Program Special Funds) [pdjh2020a0480]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study conducted a meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization analysis to evaluate the correlation between ankylosing spondylitis and lung cancer. The meta-analysis results showed no significant association between ankylosing spondylitis and lung cancer. However, after excluding a study with high heterogeneity, ankylosing spondylitis was found to be associated with a 19% increased risk of lung cancer. Subgroup analyses indicated that ankylosing spondylitis was not associated with increased risks of lung cancer in both European and non-European patients. Nevertheless, the Mendelian randomization results indicated that genetically determined ankylosing spondylitis was causally correlated with a remarkably increased risk of lung cancer among European populations. Subgroup analyses further elucidated that genetically determined ankylosing spondylitis was causally associated with a notably higher risk of only squamous cell lung cancer, rather than lung adenocarcinoma. In addition, the results indicated the absence of pleiotropy.
Background: It remains uncertain whether ankylosing spondylitis is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer.Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the correlation between ankylosing spondylitis and lung cancer based on existing literature. Eligible studies were identified by searching the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library before 26 March 2021. Subgroup analyses based on regions were also carried out. To further explore their causality, a two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis was performed, with 25 ankylosing spondylitis-related single nucleotide polymorphisms derived from the largest sample genome-wide association study of ankylosing spondylitis (ebi-a-GCST005529, 22,647 individuals). The inverse variance-weighted method was applied to estimate the causality, and the pleiotropy was assessed utilizing the Mendelian randomization-Egger regression approach.Results: The meta-analysis including seven studies, with a total of 39,186 individuals, suggested no significant association between ankylosing spondylitis and lung cancer (relative risk, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.36; I2, 61.8%). After excluding one study leading to high heterogeneity, we found that ankylosing spondylitis was associated with a 19% increased risk of lung cancer (relative risk, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.40; I2, 0.0%). Subgroup analyses suggested that ankylosing spondylitis was not associated with increased risks of lung cancer in neither European (relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.39; I2, 0.0%) nor non-European (relative risk, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.55; I2, 79.6%) patients. Nevertheless, the Mendelian randomization results indicated that genetically determined ankylosing spondylitis was causally correlated with a remarkably increased risk of lung cancer among European populations (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.48). Subgroup analyses further elucidated that genetically determined ankylosing spondylitis was causally associated with a notably higher risk of only squamous cell lung cancer (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.83), rather than lung adenocarcinoma (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.54). In addition, the results indicated the absence of pleiotropy.Conclusion: The results of both modified meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization analysis suggested that ankylosing spondylitis was likely to be correlated with the development of lung cancer. Further research is warranted to clarify the specific mechanism regarding the causality between the two diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据