Appraising the Causal Role of Risk Factors in Coronary Artery Disease and Stroke: A Systematic Review of Mendelian Randomization Studies

Author:

Georgiou Andrea N.1ORCID,Zagkos Loukas2ORCID,Markozannes Georgios12ORCID,Chalitsios Christos V.1ORCID,Asimakopoulos Alexandros G.1ORCID,Xu Wei3,Wang Lijuan3,Mesa‐Eguiagaray Ines3ORCID,Zhou Xuan3,Loizidou Eleni M.14,Kretsavos Nikolaos1,Theodoratou Evropi35,Gill Dipender26ORCID,Burgess Stephen67,Evangelou Evangelos128ORCID,Tsilidis Konstantinos K.12,Tzoulaki Ioanna29ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology University of Ioannina School of Medicine Ioannina Greece

2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics School of Public Health, Imperial College London London UK

3. Centre for Global Health, Usher Institute The University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

4. Biobank Cyprus Center of Excellence in Biobanking and Biomedical Research University of Cyprus Nicosia Cyprus

5. Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer The University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

6. Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK

7. Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK

8. Department of Biomedical Research, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology Foundation for Research and Technology‐Hellas Ioannina Greece

9. Centre for Systems Biology, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens Athens Greece

Abstract

BACKGROUND Mendelian randomization (MR) offers a powerful approach to study potential causal associations between exposures and health outcomes by using genetic variants associated with an exposure as instrumental variables. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarize previous MR studies and to evaluate the evidence for causality for a broad range of exposures in relation to coronary artery disease and stroke. METHODS AND RESULTS MR studies investigating the association of any genetically predicted exposure with coronary artery disease or stroke were identified. Studies were classified into 4 categories built on the significance of the main MR analysis results and its concordance with sensitivity analyses, namely, robust, probable, suggestive, and insufficient. Studies reporting associations that did not perform any sensitivity analysis were classified as nonevaluable. We identified 2725 associations eligible for evaluation, examining 535 distinct exposures. Of them, 141 were classified as robust, 353 as probable, 110 as suggestive, and 926 had insufficient evidence. The most robust associations were observed for anthropometric traits, lipids, and lipoproteins and type 2 diabetes with coronary artery; disease and clinical measurements with coronary artery disease and stroke; and thrombotic factors with stroke. CONCLUSIONS Despite the large number of studies that have been conducted, only a limited number of associations were supported by robust evidence. Approximately half of the studies reporting associations presented an MR sensitivity analysis along with the main analysis that further supported the causality of associations. Future research should focus on more thorough assessments of sensitivity MR analyses and further assessments of mediation effects or nonlinearity of associations.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3