4.3 Article

Genetically predicted telomere length and multiple sclerosis

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2022.103731

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; Telomere length; Aging; Mendelian randomization; Genetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found a causal relationship between longer telomere length and increased risk of multiple sclerosis (MS) susceptibility through two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis.
Background: Previous epidemiological studies have indicated a role for telomere length in multiple sclerosis (MS) severity and phenotype. However, these studies failed to establish the causality between telomere length and MS susceptibility. Hence, we performed two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to explore the causal relationship between telomere length and MS susceptibility. Methods: We used data of genetic variants associated with leukocyte telomere length as instrumental variables (IVs), which was identified from the largest and latest genome-wide association study (GWAS) from UK Biobank (UKB) with 472,174 participants. Summary data of MS was obtained from the International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium. We performed two-sample MR analyses using the inverse-variance weighted method as the primary approach. Other MR approaches, including the MR-Egger, the inverse variance weighted (multiplicative random effects), weighted median, simple median, weighted mode-based methods, and Causal Analysis Using Summary Effect estimates (CAUSE), were also conducted to detect the result robustness. Results: The genetic liability to longer telomere length was associated with a higher risk of MS susceptibility (odds ratio [OR] per one-SD telomere length, 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48-2.47; P = 8.04 x 10(-7)). The results remained consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Our study supports the causal relationship between longer telomere length and increased risk of MS susceptibility.

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

4.3
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