Abstract
Background Genetic influences on body mass index (BMI) appear to markedly differ across life, yet existing research is equivocal and limited by a paucity of life course data. Better understanding changes across life in the determinants of BMI may inform etiology, the timing of preventative efforts, and the interpretation of increasing number of studies utilizing genetically-informed designs to study BMI. We thus used a birth cohort study to investigate differences in association and explained variance in the polygenic prediction of BMI from infancy to old age (2-69 years) in a single sample. A secondary aim was to investigate how a key purported environmental influence on BMI (childhood socioeconomic position) differed across life, and whether it operated independently and/or multiplicatively of genetic influences.
Methods Data were from up to 2677 participants in the MRC National Survey of Health and Development, with measured weight and height from infancy to old age (12 timepoints from 2-69 years) and genetic data (obtained from blood samples at 53 years). We derived three polygenic indices derived from GWAS of a) adult BMI, b) recalled childhood body size, and c) childhood-adolescence BMI. We investigated associations of each polygenic index and BMI at each age and compared in terms of absolute effect size (β) and explained variance (R2). We used linear and quantile regression models, and finally investigated the additive or multiplicative role of childhood socioeconomic position.
Results Mean BMI and its variance increased across adulthood. For polygenic liability to higher adult BMI (Khera et al), the trajectories of effect size (β) and explained variance (R2) diverged: explained variance peaked in early adulthood and plateaued thereafter, while absolute effect sizes increased throughout adulthood. For polygenic liability to higher childhood BMI, explained variance was largest in adolescence and early adulthood; effect sizes were marginally smaller in absolute terms from adolescence to adulthood. All polygenic indices were related to higher variation in BMI; effect sizes were sizably larger at the upper end of the BMI distribution. Socioeconomic and polygenic risk for higher BMI across life appear to operate additively; we found little evidence of interaction.
Conclusion Our findings highlight the likely independent influences of polygenic and socioeconomic factors on BMI across life. Despite sizable associations, the BMI variance explained by each plateaued or declined across adulthood while BMI variance itself increased. This is suggestive of the increasing importance of chance (‘non-shared’) environmental influences on BMI across life.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
DB is supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/M001660/1). DB and LW by the Medical Research Council (MR/V002147/1). RH is Director of CLOSER which is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (award reference ES/K000357/1). DMW is funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00019/2). NMD works in a unit that receives support from the University of Bristol and the UK Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1) and is supported by a Norwegian Research Council Grant number 295989. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Data are available via application from the following: https://www.nshd.mrc.ac.uk/data The study has received ethical approval from the North Thames Multicentre Research Ethics Committee (reference 98/2/121 and 07/H1008/168).
I 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.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.