4.7 Article

Vitamin D and the Risk of Depression: A Causal Relationship? Findings from a Mendelian Randomization Study

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11051085

Keywords

vitamin D; depression; depressive symptoms; Mendelian randomization

Funding

  1. Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Duisburg-Essen
  2. Landesprogramm fur Geschlechtergerechte Hochschulen-Programmstrang Forderung von Denominationen in der Genderforschung

Ask authors/readers for more resources

While observational studies show an association between 25(OH)vitamin D concentrations and depressive symptoms, intervention studies, which examine the preventive effects of vitamin D supplementation on the development of depression, are lacking. To estimate the role of lowered 25(OH)vitamin D concentrations in the etiology of depressive disorders, we conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study on depression, i.e., depressive symptoms (DS, n = 161,460) and broad depression (BD, n = 113,769 cases and 208,811 controls). Six single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which were genome-wide significantly associated with 25(OH)vitamin D concentrations in 79,366 subjects from the SUNLIGHT genome-wide association study (GWAS), were used as an instrumental variable. None of the six SNPs was associated with DS or BD (all p > 0.05). MR analysis revealed no causal effects of 25(OH)vitamin D concentration, either on DS (inverse variance weighted (IVW); b = 0.025, SE = 0.038, p = 0.52) or on BD (IVW; b = 0.020, SE = 0.012, p = 0.10). Sensitivity analyses confirmed that 25(OH)vitamin D concentrations were not significantly associated with DS or BD. The findings from this MR study indicate no causal relationship between vitamin D concentrations and depressive symptoms, or broad depression. Conflicting findings from observational studies might have resulted from residual confounding or reverse causation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available