4.7 Article

Relationship between Serum 25(OH)D and Depression: Causal Evidence from a Bi-Directional Mendelian Randomization Study

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu13010109

关键词

25(OH)D; nutritional vitamin D status; depression; observational analysis; Mendelian randomization; UK Biobank

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [GNT1157281]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found a genetic link between depression and lower vitamin D levels, but was unable to confirm the beneficial effect of vitamin D on depression risk.
The relationship between depression and vitamin D deficiency is complex, with evidence mostly from studies affected by confounding and reverse causality. We examined the causality and direction of the relationship between 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and depression in bi-directional Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses using information from up to 307,618 white British participants from the UK Biobank and summary results from the SUNLIGHT (n = 79,366) and Psychiatric Genomics consortia (PGC 113,154 cases and 218,523 controls). In observational analysis, the odds of depression decreased with higher 25(OH)D concentrations (adjusted odds ratio (OR) per 50% increase 0.95, 95%CI 0.94-0.96). In MR inverse variance weighted (IVW) using the UK Biobank, there was no association between genetically determined serum 25(OH)D and depression (OR per 50% higher 0.97, 95%CI 0.90-1.05) with consistent null association across all MR approaches and in data from PGC consortium. In contrast, genetic liability to depression was associated with lower 25(OH)D concentrations (MR IVW -3.26%, -4.94%--1.55%), with the estimates remaining generally consistent after meta-analysing with the consortia. In conclusion, we found genetic evidence for a causal effect of depression on lower 25(OH)D concentrations, however we could not confirm a beneficial effect of nutritional vitamin D status on depression risk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据