PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Lee, L
AU  - Walker, R. M.
AU  - Whiteley, W. N.
TI  - Assessing the role of vascular risk factors in dementia: Mendelian randomization meta-analysis and comparison with observational estimates
AID  - 10.1101/2022.02.23.22271334
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.02.23.22271334
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/25/2022.02.23.22271334.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/25/2022.02.23.22271334.full
AB  - Importance Although observational studies demonstrate that higher levels of vascular risk factors are associated with an increased risk of dementia, these associations might be explained by confounding or other biases. Mendelian randomization (MR) uses genetic instruments to test causal relationships in observational data.Objective To determine if genetically predicted modifiable risk factors (type 2 diabetes mellitus, low density lipoprotein cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, body mass index, and circulating glucose) are associated with dementia by meta-analysing published MR studies. Secondary objectives were to identify heterogeneity in effect estimates across primary MR studies and to compare meta-analysis results with observational studies.Data sources MR studies identified by systematic search of Web of Science, OVID and Scopus.Study selection Primary MR studies investigating the modifiable risk factors of interest. Only one study from each cohort per risk factor was included. A quality assessment tool was developed to primarily assess the three assumptions of MR for each MR study.Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted on study characteristics, exposure and outcome, effect estimates per unit increase, and measures of variation. Effect estimates were pooled to generate an overall estimate, I2 and Cochrane Q values using fixed-effect model.Main outcomes and measures Odds ratio (OR) of developing dementia per standardized unit increase in the risk factor of interest.Results We screened 5211 studies and included 12 primary MR studies after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Higher genetically predicted body mass index was associated with a higher odds of dementia (OR 1.03 [1.01, 1.05] per 5 kg/m2 increase, one study, p = 0.00285). Overall estimates from MR studies showed a smaller number of associations than those from meta-analyses of observational studies.Conclusion and relevance Genetically predicted body mass index was associated with an increase in risk of dementia.Question Are genetically predicted modifiable risk factors associated with dementia?Findings Genetically predicted higher body mass index was associated with a higher odds of dementia. No evidence was found to support an association between genetically predicted type 2 diabetes mellitus, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, plasma glucose and dementia risk.Meaning Many modifiable risk factors associated with dementia in observational studies may not play a causative role.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.protocols.io/view/systematic-review-and-meta-analysis-of-mendelian-r-bpeemjbe Funding StatementThis study did not receive any funding. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.