Traumatic Brain Injury Increasing Risk of Meningioma? From the Genetic Evidence.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2024.10.003
Chunming He, Tao Long, Huaiyu Zhou, Chuan Zeng, Peng Xiong, Xinyu Qiu, Haimin Song
{"title":"Traumatic Brain Injury Increasing Risk of Meningioma? From the Genetic Evidence.","authors":"Chunming He, Tao Long, Huaiyu Zhou, Chuan Zeng, Peng Xiong, Xinyu Qiu, Haimin Song","doi":"10.1016/j.wneu.2024.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Numerous studies have demonstrated a strong association between traumatic brain injury (TBI) and an increased risk of meningioma. However, this correlation remains controversial. This study utilized Mendelian randomization to explore this relationship from the perspective of genetic evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We employed 6 TBI genome-wide association study datasets from the integrative epidemiology unit genome-wide association study database. Summary statistics for meningioma were sourced from the FinnGen R10 database. We assessed heterogeneity and horizontal pleiotropy within the analyzed data. The primary method was inverse variance weighting (IVW) to investigate the causal relationship between TBI and meningioma, excluding cases with horizontal pleiotropy. Four supplementary analysis methods were also used, with abnormal results excluded based on leave-one-out sensitivity analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 6 Mendelian randomization analyses indicated no causal relationship between TBI and meningiomas (focal brain injury IVW P value = 0.98; diffuse brain injury IVW P value = 0.41; TBI without concussion IVW P value = 0.45; intracranial trauma IVW P value = 0.34; traumatic subdural hemorrhage IVW P value = 0.80; traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage IVW P value = 0.92).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Mendelian randomization study revealed that TBI does not increase the risk of meningioma based on genetic evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.10.003","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Numerous studies have demonstrated a strong association between traumatic brain injury (TBI) and an increased risk of meningioma. However, this correlation remains controversial. This study utilized Mendelian randomization to explore this relationship from the perspective of genetic evidence.

Methods: We employed 6 TBI genome-wide association study datasets from the integrative epidemiology unit genome-wide association study database. Summary statistics for meningioma were sourced from the FinnGen R10 database. We assessed heterogeneity and horizontal pleiotropy within the analyzed data. The primary method was inverse variance weighting (IVW) to investigate the causal relationship between TBI and meningioma, excluding cases with horizontal pleiotropy. Four supplementary analysis methods were also used, with abnormal results excluded based on leave-one-out sensitivity analysis.

Results: All 6 Mendelian randomization analyses indicated no causal relationship between TBI and meningiomas (focal brain injury IVW P value = 0.98; diffuse brain injury IVW P value = 0.41; TBI without concussion IVW P value = 0.45; intracranial trauma IVW P value = 0.34; traumatic subdural hemorrhage IVW P value = 0.80; traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage IVW P value = 0.92).

Conclusions: The Mendelian randomization study revealed that TBI does not increase the risk of meningioma based on genetic evidence.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脑外伤增加脑膜瘤风险?遗传学证据
背景:大量研究表明,创伤性脑损伤(TBI)与脑膜瘤风险增加之间存在密切联系。然而,这种相关性仍然存在争议。本研究利用 "泯灭随机化 "方法从遗传学证据的角度探讨了这一关系:我们采用了来自 IEU GWAS 数据库的六个创伤性脑损伤全基因组关联研究(GWAS)数据集。脑膜瘤的汇总统计数据来自芬兰基因 R10 数据库。我们评估了分析数据中的异质性和水平多向性。主要方法是采用反方差加权法(IVW)来研究创伤性脑损伤与脑膜瘤之间的因果关系,同时排除水平多向性的病例。此外,还使用了四种补充分析方法,并根据留一敏感性分析排除了异常结果:六项孟德尔随机分析均表明创伤性脑损伤与脑膜瘤之间没有因果关系(局灶性脑损伤 IVW p 值 = 0.98;弥漫性脑损伤 IVW p 值 = 0.41;无脑震荡的创伤性脑损伤 IVW p 值 = 0.45;颅内创伤 IVW p 值 = 0.34;创伤性硬膜下出血 IVW p 值 = 0.80;创伤性蛛网膜下腔出血 IVW p 值 = 0.92):孟德尔随机研究表明,根据遗传学证据,脑外伤不会增加脑膜瘤的发病风险。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Management of Cholesteatoma: Hearing Rehabilitation. Congenital Cholesteatoma. Evaluation of Cholesteatoma. Management of Cholesteatoma: Extension Beyond Middle Ear/Mastoid. Recidivism and Recurrence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1