IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0258498.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying modifiable risk factors of lung cancer: Indications from Mendelian randomization

Author

Listed:
  • Jie Ding
  • Zhenxing Tu
  • Hongquan Chen
  • Zhiguang Liu

Abstract

Background: Lung cancer is the major cause of mortality in tumor patients. While its incidence rate has recently declined, it is still far from satisfactory and its potential modifiable risk factors should be explored. Methods: We performed a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to investigate the causal relationship between potentially modifiable risk factors (namely smoking behavior, alcohol intake, anthropometric traits, blood pressure, lipidemic traits, glycemic traits, and fasting insulin) and lung cancer. Besides, a bi-directional MR analysis was carried out to disentangle the complex relationship between different risk factors. Inverse-variance weighted (IVW) was utilized to combine the estimation for each SNP. Cochrane’s Q value was used to evaluate heterogeneity and two methods, including MR-Egger intercept and MR-PRESSO, were adopted to detect horizontal pleiotropy. Results: Three kinds of smoking behavior were all causally associated with lung cancer. Overall, smokers were more likely to suffer from lung cancer compared with non-smokers (OR = 2.58 [1.95, 3.40], p-value = 2.07 x 10−11), and quitting smoking could reduce the risk (OR = 4.29[2.60, 7.07], p-value = 1.23 x 10−8). Furthermore, we found a dose-response relationship between the number of cigarettes and lung cancer (OR = 6.10 [5.35, 6.96], p-value = 4.43x10-161). Lower HDL cholesterol could marginally increase the risk of lung cancer, but become insignificant after Bonferroni correction (OR = 0.82 [0.68, 1.00], p-value = 0.045). In addition, we noted no direct causal relationship between other risk factors and lung cancer. Neither heterogeneity nor pleiotropy was observed in this study. However, when treating the smoking behavior as the outcome, we found the increased BMI could elevate the number of cigarettes per day (beta = 0.139[0.104, 0.175], p-value = 1.99x10-14) and a similar effect was observed for the waist circumference and hip circumference. Additionally, the elevation of SBP could also marginally increase the number of cigarettes per day (beta = 0.001 [0.0002, 0.002], p-value = 0.018). Conclusion: Smoking behavior might be the most direct and effective modifiable way to reduce the risk of lung cancer. Meanwhile, smoking behavior can be affected by other risk factors, especially obesity.

Suggested Citation

  • Jie Ding & Zhenxing Tu & Hongquan Chen & Zhiguang Liu, 2021. "Identifying modifiable risk factors of lung cancer: Indications from Mendelian randomization," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-21, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0258498
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258498
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258498&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0258498?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0258498. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.