Abstract
Background
Evidence from observational studies shows that inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [comprising ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD)] is a risk factor to Oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer (OC&PC) [comprising Oral cavity cancer (OCC) and Oropharyngeal cancer (OPC)], but it is unclear whether these diseases have potential causality.
Objectives
We aimed to explore the causal relationship between IBD and OC&PC.
Materials and methods
A mendelian randomized (MR) study was performed to estimate the causal relationship between IBD and OC&PC.
Results
The potential causal relationship was statistically significant between IBD and OCC (OR = 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02–1.27, p = .02), UC and OCC (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01–1.27, p = .03), respectively. There was a universal null effect of IBD on OC&PC (IBD: OR = 1.01, 95%CI: 0.93–1.10, p = .74; UC: OR = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.92–1.10, p = .94; CD: OR = 1.02, 95%CI: 0.94–1.09, p = .69), and IBD on OPC (IBD: OR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.81–1.06, p = 0.26; UC: OR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.79–1.03, p = .12; CD: OR = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.94–1.15, p = .44).
Conclusions and significance
MR analyses support new evidence indicating there may be a positive causal effect of IBD (including UC) on OCC. Further investigation of the potential biological mechanisms is necessary.
Chinese abstract
背景:观察性研究的证据表明, 炎症性肠病 (IBD) [包括溃疡性结肠炎 (UC) 和克罗恩病 (CD)] 是口腔部和咽部癌症(OC&PC)的危险因素 [包括口腔癌 (OCC) 和口咽癌 (OPC)]。但是, 至于这些疾病是否有潜在的因果关系, 还不清楚。
目的:探索 IBD 与 OC&PC 之间的因果关系。
材料和方法:进行孟德尔随机 (MR) 研究以估计IBD 和 OC&PC 之间的因果关系。
结果:IBD 和 OCC 之间的潜在因果关系具有统计学意义(OR =1.14, 95% 置信区间 (CI): 1.02–1.27, p = .02), UC 和 OCC之间同样如此 (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01–1.27, p = .03)。 IBD 对 OC&PC 存在普遍的零效应(IBD:OR = 1.01, 95%CI:0.93–1.10, p = .74; UC:OR = 1.00, 95%CI:0.92–1.10, p = .94; CD:OR = 1.02, 95%CI:0.94–1.09, p = .69), 对 OPC 同样如此 (IBD: OR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.81–1.06, p = 0.26; UC: OR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.79–1.03, p = .12; CD:OR = 1.04, 95%CI:0.94–1.15, p = .44)。
结论和意义:MR 分析支持IBD(包括UC)对OCC有因果效应的新证据。有必要进一步研究潜在的生物学机制。
Acknowledgements
We express our gratitude to the participants and research teams from UK Biobank that made the GWAS results publicly accessible.
Ethical considerations
No ethical clearance was required for this research, for no patients were involved in the development of the research question or its outcome measures. Only secondary analysis was performed using published GWAS summary statistics available in the public domain.
Contributions: (I) Conception and design: All authors; (II) Administrative support: All authors; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: All authors; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: All authors; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: All authors; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).