Vitamin D and risk of pregnancy related hypertensive disorders: mendelian randomisation study

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
33
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2018
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
Autores
MAGNUS, Maria C.
MILIKU, Kozeta
BAUER, Anna
ENGEL, Stephanie M.
FELIX, Janine F.
JADDOE, Vincent W. V.
LAWLOR, Debbie A.
LONDON, Stephanie J.
MAGNUS, Per
MCGINNIS, Ralph
Citação
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, v.361, article ID k2167, 9p, 2018
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
OBJECTIVE To use mendelian randomisation to investigate whether 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration has a causal effect on gestational hypertension or pre-eclampsia. DESIGN One and two sample mendelian randomisation analyses. SETTING Two European pregnancy cohorts (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, and Generation R Study), and two case-control studies (subgroup nested within the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study, and the UK Genetics of Pre-eclampsia Study). PARTICIPANTS 7389 women in a one sample mendelian randomisation analysis (751 with gestational hypertension and 135 with pre-eclampsia), and 3388 pre-eclampsia cases and 6059 controls in a two sample mendelian randomisation analysis. EXPOSURES Single nucleotide polymorphisms in genes associated with vitamin D synthesis (rs10741657 and rs12785878) and metabolism (rs6013897 and rs2282679) were used as instrumental variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia defined according to the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy. RESULTS In the conventional multivariable analysis, the relative risk for pre-eclampsia was 1.03 (95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.07) per 10% decrease in 25-hydroxyvitamin D level, and 2.04 (1.02 to 4.07) for 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels < 25 nmol/L compared with >= 75 nmol/L. No association was found for gestational hypertension. The one sample mendelian randomisation analysis using the total genetic risk score as an instrument did not provide strong evidence of a linear effect of 25-hydroxyvitamin D on the risk of gestational hypertension or pre-eclampsia: odds ratio 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.03) and 1.19 (0.92 to 1.52) per 10% decrease, respectively. The two sample mendelian randomisation estimate gave an odds ratio for preeclampsia of 0.98 (0.89 to 1.07) per 10% decrease in 25-hydroxyvitamin D level, an odds ratio of 0.96 (0.80 to 1.15) per unit increase in the log(odds) of 25-hydroxyvitamin D level < 75 nmol/L, and an odds ratio of 0.93 (0.73 to 1.19) per unit increase in the log(odds) of 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels < 50 nmol/L. CONCLUSIONS No strong evidence was found to support a causal effect of vitamin D status on gestational hypertension or pre-eclampsia. Future mendelian randomisation studies with a larger number of women with preeclampsia or more genetic instruments that would increase the proportion of 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels explained by the instrument are needed.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. Adela R, 2017, FRONT IMMUNOL, V8, DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00273
  2. Aghajafari F, 2013, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V346, DOI 10.1136/bmj.f1169
  3. Ahn J, 2010, HUM MOL GENET, V19, P2739, DOI 10.1093/hmg/ddq155
  4. Berry DJ, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0037465
  5. Bowden J, 2015, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V44, P512, DOI 10.1093/ije/dyv080
  6. Boyd A, 2013, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V42, P111, DOI 10.1093/ije/dys064
  7. Brown MA, 2001, HYPERTENS PREGNANCY, V20, pIX, DOI 10.1081/PRG-100104165
  8. Burgess S, 2014, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V43, P922, DOI 10.1093/ije/dyu005
  9. Burgess S, 2013, GENET EPIDEMIOL, V37, P658, DOI 10.1002/gepi.21758
  10. Burgess S, 2012, BRIT MED J, V345, DOI 10.1136/bmj.e7325
  11. Burris HH, 2014, ANN EPIDEMIOL, V24, P399, DOI 10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.02.001
  12. Cardus A, 2006, KIDNEY INT, V69, P1377, DOI 10.1038/sj.ki.5000304
  13. Chaiworapongsa T, 2014, NAT REV NEPHROL, V10, P466, DOI 10.1038/nrneph.2014.102
  14. Chu J, 2018, HUM REPROD, V33, P65, DOI 10.1093/humrep/dex326
  15. Cole TJ, 2000, STAT MED, V19, P3109, DOI 10.1002/1097-0258(20001130)19:22<3109::AID-SIM558>3.0.CO;2-F
  16. De-Regil LM, 2016, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD008873.pub3
  17. Evans KN, 2004, J SOC GYNECOL INVEST, V11, P263, DOI 10.1016/j.jsgi.2004.02.002
  18. Fraser A, 2013, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V42, P97, DOI 10.1093/ije/dys066
  19. GOPEC Consortium, 2005, AM J HUM GENET, V77, P127
  20. Holick MF, 2011, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V96, P1911, DOI 10.1210/jc.2011-0385
  21. Hossain N, 2014, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V99, P2448, DOI 10.1210/jc.2013-3491
  22. Klungsoyr K, 2014, PAEDIATR PERINAT EP, V28, P362, DOI 10.1111/ppe.12138
  23. Kooijman MN, 2016, EUR J EPIDEMIOL, V31, P1243, DOI 10.1007/s10654-016-0224-9
  24. Lawlor DA, 2008, STAT MED, V27, P1133, DOI 10.1002/sim.3034
  25. Lawlor DA, 2016, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V45, P1866, DOI 10.1093/ije/dyw314
  26. Li YC, 2002, J CLIN INVEST, V110, P229, DOI 10.1172/JCI200215219
  27. Mojibian M, 2015, INT J REPROD BIOMED, V13, P687
  28. Muscogiuri G, 2017, REV ENDOCR METAB DIS, V18, P273, DOI 10.1007/s11154-017-9407-2
  29. Norwegian Health Directorate, 2018, KOSTH GRAV DIET PREG
  30. Palacios C, 2014, J STEROID BIOCHEM, V144, P138, DOI 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2013.11.003
  31. Powe CE, 2010, HYPERTENSION, V56, P758, DOI 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.158238
  32. Purswani JM, 2017, BMC PREGNANCY CHILDB, V17, DOI 10.1186/s12884-017-1408-3
  33. Roth DE, 2017, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V359, DOI 10.1136/bmj.j5237
  34. Sasan SB, 2017, OBSTET GYNECOL INT, DOI 10.1155/2017/8249264
  35. Smith GD, 2003, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V32, P1, DOI 10.1093/ije/dyg070
  36. UK National Health Service, 2015, VIT SUPPL NUTR PREGN
  37. US Institute of Medicine, 2010, DIETARY REFERENCE IN
  38. van Weert B, 2016, MIDWIFERY, V34, P117, DOI 10.1016/j.midw.2015.12.007
  39. Vimaleswaran KS, 2013, PLOS MED, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001383
  40. Wang TJ, 2010, LANCET, V376, P180, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60588-0
  41. World Health Organisation, 2016, WHO REC ANT CAR POS