4.6 Article

The causal relationship between abdominal obesity and lower bone mineral density: A two-sample mendelian randomization study

期刊

FRONTIERS IN GENETICS
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.970223

关键词

abdominal obesity; bone mineral density; with waist circumference; hip circumference; waist-to-hip ratio; mendelian randomization

资金

  1. Joint fund project of science and technology innovation of Fujian Province
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province
  3. [2020Y9157]
  4. [2020J05274]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used Mendelian randomization to assess the causal effect of abdominal obesity on bone mineral density. The results showed a negative causal relationship between abdominal obesity and bone mineral density.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to assess the causal effect of abdominal obesity on bone mineral density by two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR). Methods: Abdominal obesity was chosen as exposure in this study. Single nucleotide polymorphisms, extracted from Genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) data, which are closely associated with waist circumference (WC), hip circumference (HC), and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) were used as instrumental variables to perform MR studies. Different site bone mineral density, such as total bone mineral density (TBMD) and forearm bone mineral density (FBMD) were chosen as outcomes. Inverse variance weighted (IVW) was used as the primary method to assess this causality. Results: According to the IVW method (beta = -0.177; 95% CI = -0.287, -0.067; p = 1.52 x 10(-3)), WC had a negative causal relationship with TBMD, besides, with one standard deviation (SD) higher in HC, there was a 0.195 SD decrease in TBMD (95% CI = -0.279, -0.110; p = 6.32 x 10(-6)), and with an increase of one SD in HC was related to a decrease of 0.312 SD in FBMD analyzed by the IVW. Conclusion: This study showed that abdominal obesity has a negative effect on bone mineral density.

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

4.6
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