Dataset Information

Iron Status May Not Affect Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Mendelian Randomization Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Observational studies have shown an association of increased iron status with a higher risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Iron status might be a novel target for ALS prevention if a causal relationship exists. We aimed to reveal the causality between iron status and ALS incidence using a large two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR).

Methods

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for iron status were identified from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) on 48,972 individuals. The outcome data came from the largest ALS GWAS to date (20,806 cases; 59,804 controls). We conducted conservative analyses (using SNPs with concordant change of biomarkers of iron status) and liberal analyses (using SNPs associated with at least one of the biomarkers of iron status), with inverse variance weighted (IVW) method as the main analysis. We then performed sensitivity analyses including weighted median, MR-Egger and MR-pleiotropy residual sum and outlier, as well as leave-one-out analysis to detect pleiotropy.

Results

In the conservative analyses, we found no evidence of association between four biomarkers of iron status and ALS using IVW method with odds ratio (OR) 1.00 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-1.11] per standard deviation (SD) increase in iron, 0.96 (95% CI: 0.77-1.21) in ferritin, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.92-1.07) in transferrin saturation, and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.93-1.16) in transferrin. Findings from liberal analyses were similar, and sensitivity analyses suggested no pleiotropy detected (all p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest no causal effect between iron status and risk of ALS. Efforts to change the iron status to decrease ALS incidence might be impractical.

SUBMITTER: Cai J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7969891 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a relatively common and rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease that, in the majority of cases, is thought to be determined by a complex gene-environment interaction. Exponential growth in the number of performed genome-wide association studies combined with the advent of Mendelian randomization is opening significant new opportunities to identify environmental exposures that increase or decrease the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Each of these discoveries has the potential to shape new therapeutic interventions. However, to do so, rigorous methodological standards must be applied in the performance of Mendelian randomization. We have reviewed Mendelian randomization studies performed in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis to date. We identified 20 Mendelian randomization studies, including evaluation of physical exercise, adiposity, cognitive performance, immune function, blood lipids, sleep behaviours, educational attainment, alcohol consumption, smoking and type 2 diabetes mellitus. We have evaluated each study using gold standard methodology supported by the Mendelian randomization literature and the STROBE-Mendelian randomization checklist. Where discrepancies exist between Mendelian randomization studies, we suggest the underlying reasons. A number of studies conclude that there is a causal link between blood lipids and risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; replication across different datasets and even different populations adds confidence. For other putative risk factors, such as smoking and immune function, Mendelian randomization studies have provided cause for doubt. We highlight the use of positive control analyses in choosing exposure single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to make up the Mendelian randomization instrument, use of SNP clumping to avoid false positive results due to SNPs in linkage and the importance of multiple testing correction. We discuss the implications of survival bias for study of late age of onset diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and make recommendations to mitigate this potentially important confounder. For Mendelian randomization to be useful to the amyotrophic lateral sclerosis field, high methodological standards must be applied to ensure reproducibility. Mendelian randomization is already an impactful tool, but poor-quality studies will lead to incorrect interpretations by a field that includes non-statisticians, wasted resources and missed opportunities.