4.7 Article

Absence of causal association between Vitamin D and bone mineral density across the lifespan: a Mendelian randomization study

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-14548-5

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81972103]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study used Mendelian randomization analysis to investigate the causal effect of vitamin D on bone mineral density (BMD). The results showed no causal association between genetically determined vitamin D and BMD across the lifespan, providing evidence for the role of vitamin D supplementation in preventing osteoporosis in high-risk populations.
Vitamin D deficiency is a candidate risk factor for osteoporosis, characterized by decreased bone mineral density (BMD). We performed this two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the causal effect of vitamin D on BMD. We extracted 143 single-nucleotide polymorphisms from a recent GWAS on 417,580 participants of European ancestry as instrumental variables, and used summary statistics for BMD at forearm (n = 10,805), femoral neck (n = 49,988), lumbar spine (n = 44,731) and total-body of different age-stages (< 15, 15-30, 30-45, 45-60, > 60) (n = 67,358). We explored the direct effect of vitamin D on BMD with an adjusted body mass index (BMI) in a multivariable MR analysis. We found no support for causality of 25-hydroxyvitamin D on BMD at forearm, femoral neck, lumbar spine, and total-body BMD across the lifespan. There was no obvious difference between the total and direct effect of vitamin D on BMD after adjusting for BMI. Our MR analysis provided evidence that genetically determined vitamin D was not causally associated with BMD in the general population. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted to investigate the role of vitamin D supplementation in preventing osteoporosis in the high-risk population.

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