| Literature DB >> 32076698 |
Milad Nazarzadeh1,2,3, Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes1,2, Zeinab Bidel1,2,3, Abbas Dehghan4, Dexter Canoy1,2,5,6, Abdelaali Hassaine1,2, Jose Roberto Ayala Solares1,2, Gholamreza Salimi-Khorshidi1,2, George Davey Smith7, Catherine M Otto8, Kazem Rahimi1,2,5.
Abstract
AIMS: Aortic valve stenosis is commonly considered a degenerative disorder with no recommended preventive intervention, with only valve replacement surgery or catheter intervention as treatment options. We sought to assess the causal association between exposure to lipid levels and risk of aortic stenosis. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Blood cholesterol; Heart valve diseases; Lipid profile; Mendelian randomization analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32076698 PMCID: PMC7654932 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa070
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Heart J ISSN: 0195-668X Impact factor: 29.983
Two-sample Mendelian randomization estimations showing the effect of plasma lipids on aortic stenosis
| Methods | Exposure | Odds ratio | 95% CI |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inverse-variance weighted | HDL-cholesterol | 0.86 | 0.69 | 1.06 | 0.17 | <0.001 | 117.1 |
| MR-Egger | 0.98 | 0.70 | 1.37 | 0.91 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.009 | −0.026 | 0.008 | 0.31 | |||
|
| |||||||
| Inverse-variance weighted | LDL-cholesterol | 1.58 | 1.30 | 1.91 | <0.001 | 0.01 | 81.6 |
| MR-Egger | 1.63 | 1.19 | 2.24 | <0.001 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MR-PRESSO | 1.59 | 1.34 | 1.90 | <0.001 | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.002 | −0.022 | 0.017 | 0.80 | |||
|
| |||||||
| Inverse-variance weighted | Total cholesterol | 1.60 | 1.33 | 1.92 | <0.001 | 0.04 | 93.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Weighted median | 1.73 | 1.33 | 2.25 | <0.001 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.009 | −0.026 | 0.009 | 0.04 | |||
|
| |||||||
| Inverse-variance weighted | Triglycerides | 1.52 | 1.12 | 2.03 | 0.006 | <0.001 | 77.5 |
| MR-Egger | 1.49 | 0.95 | 2.33 | 0.08 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.39 | 1.00 | 1.92 | 0.05 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MR-Egger intercept | 0.001 | −0.024 | 0.026 | 0.91 | |||
The best causal estimation highlighted in bold .
CI, confidence interval; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; NA, not applicable; P, P-value for heterogeneity.
Odds ratio per 1 SD increase.
No significant outliers.
Regression coefficient (95% CI).
Characteristics of Global Lipids Genetics Consortium and UK Biobank datasets
| Exposures | Consortium | No. SNPs | Sample size | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HDL-cholesterol | GLGC | 71 | 92 860 | 90% European |
| LDL-cholesterol | 57 | 83 198 | ||
| Total cholesterol | 73 | 92 260 | ||
| Triglycerides | 40 | 91 598 | ||
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||
| Aortic stenosis | UK Biobank | 1961/432 173 | 100% European | |
| Aortic regurgitation | 736/432 173 | |||
| Mitral regurgitation | 2213/432 173 | |||
| Outcomes for sensitivity analysis | ||||
| Myocardial infarction | 15 391/432 173 | |||
| Heart failure | 5161/432 173 | |||
| Aortic valve replacement | 1233/432 173 | |||
| Demographic variables | ||||
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 56.8 (8.0) | |||
| Male gender, | 198 623 (45.9) | |||
GLGC, Global Lipids Genetics Consortium; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; SD, standard deviation; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism.
Two-sample Mendelian randomization estimations showing the effect of plasma lipids on aortic regurgitation
| Methods | Exposure | Odds ratio | 95% CI |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| HDL-cholesterol |
|
|
|
| 0.40 | 72.1 |
| MR-Egger | 0.82 | 0.53 | 1.25 | 0.35 | |||
| Weighted median | 0.73 | 0.47 | 1.13 | 0.15 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | 0.005 | −0.017 | 0.027 | 0.65 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| LDL-cholesterol |
|
|
|
| 0.09 | 70.2 |
| MR-Egger | 0.94 | 0.59 | 1.51 | 0.80 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.10 | 0.73 | 1.66 | 0.63 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | 0.003 | −0.027 | 0.33 | 0.83 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Total cholesterol |
|
|
|
| 0.51 | 70.9 |
| MR-Egger | 1.06 | 0.67 | 1.69 | 0.80 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.11 | 0.74 | 1.69 | 0.61 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.013 | −0.038 | 0.013 | 0.33 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Triglycerides |
|
|
|
| 0.19 | 46.4 |
| MR-Egger | 1.21 | 0.70 | 2.09 | 0.50 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.26 | 0.77 | 2.06 | 0.36 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.013 | −0.044 | 0.018 | 0.39 | |||
The best causal estimation highlighted in bold.
CI, confidence interval; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; NA, not applicable; P, P-value for heterogeneity.
Odds ratio per 1 SD increase.
No significant outliers.
Regression coefficient (95% CI).
Two-sample Mendelian randomization estimations showing the effect of plasma lipids on mitral regurgitation
| Methods | Exposure | Odds ratio | 95% CI |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inverse-variance weighted | HDL-cholesterol | 0.84 | 0.70 | 1.02 | 0.08 | 0.0009 | 100.4 |
| MR-Egger | 0.96 | 0.72 | 1.29 | 0.80 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.009 | −0.024 | 0.006 | 0.25 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| LDL-cholesterol |
|
|
|
| 0.12 | 68.5 |
| MR-Egger | 1.07 | 0.81 | 1.40 | 0.65 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.08 | 0.85 | 1.37 | 0.52 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | 0.003 | −0.014 | 0.020 | 0.73 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Total cholesterol |
|
|
|
| 0.14 | 84.7 |
| MR-Egger | 1.19 | 0.88 | 1.60 | 0.24 | |||
| Weighted median | 1.08 | 0.85 | 1.39 | 0.50 | |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | −0.004 | −0.020 | 0.012 | 0.65 | |||
|
| |||||||
| Inverse-variance weighted | Triglycerides | 1.31 | 1.04 | 1.65 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 54.0 |
| MR-Egger | 1.30 | 0.92 | 1.85 | 0.13 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MR-PRESSO | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||
| MR-Egger intercept | 0.000 | −0.019 | 0.020 | 0.97 | |||
The best causal estimation highlighted in bold.
CI, confidence interval; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; NA, not applicable; P, P-value for heterogeneity.
Odds ratio per 1 SD increase.
No significant outliers.
Regression coefficient (95% CI).