ABSTRACT
Aims/hypothesis Observational evidence suggests a shared etiology between impaired glucose tolerance, cardiovascular risk, and fertility problems. We aim to establish whether impaired glucose tolerance (as measured by fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and fasting insulin) and cardiovascular disease risk (as measured by LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure) are causally related to infertility (having tried to conceive for ≥ 12 months or used assisted reproduction technologies to conceive) by Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses in women and men.
Methods We conducted two-sample MR analyses, in which we used genome-wide association summary data that were publicly available for the cardiometabolic risk factors, and sex specific genome-wide association studies of infertility conducted in the Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort Study (68,882 women [average age 30, involved in 81,682 pregnancies] and 47,474 of their male partners [average age 33, 55,744 pregnancies]). We applied the inverse variance weighted method with random effects to pool data across variants and a series of sensitivity analyses to explore genetic instrument validity (we checked the robustness of genetic instruments and the lack of unbalanced horizontal pleiotropy, and we used methods that are robust to population stratification). Findings were corrected for multiple comparisons by the Bonferroni method (8 exposures: p-value < 0.00625).
Results In women, increases in genetically determined fasting insulin levels were associated with greater odds of infertility (+1 log(pmol/L): OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.18, p-value = 0.003). The results were robust in the sensitivity analyses exploring the validity of MR assumptions and the role of pleiotropy of other cardiometabolic risk factors. There was also evidence of higher glucose and glycated hemoglobin in women (and possibly higher fasting insulin in men) causing infertility, but findings were imprecise and did not pass our p-value threshold for multiple testing. Results for lipids and blood pressure were close to the null, suggesting that these did not cause infertility.
Conclusions/interpretation Genetic instruments suggest that higher fasting insulin may increase infertility in women.
TWEET Mendelian randomization suggests that higher fasting #insulin levels increase the risk of #infertility in women. @alvaro_hernaez @theCEFH @Folkehelseinst @ERC_Research #MendelianRandomization
What is already known about this subject?
Observational evidence suggests impaired glucose tolerance, higher lipid concentrations, and higher blood pressure is associated with fertility problems.
What is the key question?
Are fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, fasting insulin, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure causally related to infertility in women and men?
What are the new findings?
Two-sample Mendelian randomization suggests that higher fasting insulin levels increase the risk of infertility in women. There was also evidence of higher glucose and glycated hemoglobin in women (and maybe higher fasting insulin in men) causing infertility, but results were imprecise and did not pass our p-value threshold for multiple comparisons.
Findings for lipids and blood pressure were close to the null, suggesting that these did not have a causal role on infertility.
How might this impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future?
Treatments to lower fasting insulin levels may reduce the risk of infertility in women.
INTRODUCTION
Impaired glucose tolerance and other cardiovascular risk factors are related to fertility problems in women [1, 2] and men [3]. However, these associations may be explained by unmeasured or residual confounding (e.g., adiposity) [4]. Mendelian randomization (MR), a method based on genetic instrumental variables, estimates potential causal effects that are unaffected by confounding [4]. Using this methodology, we have previously described that high and low body weight increase the risk of infertility in both sexes [5], while the previously reported associated between smoking and infertility may not be causal [6]. The aim of this study was to investigate whether biomarkers of impaired glucose tolerance (fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, fasting insulin) and cardiovascular disease risk factors (LDL cholesterol [LDL-C], HDL cholesterol [HDL-C], triglycerides, systolic and diastolic blood pressure [SBP, DBP]) influence the risk of infertility using a two-sample MR-based approach.
METHODS
Population
Our study involved data from the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) [7]. MoBa is a population-based pregnancy cohort study administered by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Pregnant women and their partners were recruited at ∼18 gestational weeks across Norway between 1999-2008. The cohort is composed by 114,500 children, 95,200 mothers and 75,200 fathers. Blood samples were obtained from both parents during pregnancy [8]. Details of the MoBa genotyping data and quality control have been previously described [9]. This work is based on a subsample of parents involved in singleton pregnancies with available genotype and infertility information (68,882 women and 47,474 men) from version 12 of the quality-assured data files released in May 11, 2022. Our study followed the STROBE checklists for MR and cohort studies.
Genetic variants and instrumental variables
We extracted independent SNPs as genetic instruments from the most recent genome-wide association studies (GWASs) on risk factors of impaired glucose metabolism, lipid profile, and blood pressure (see “Data Availability”). Independent SNPs were not in linkage disequilibrium (pairwise r2 <0.01) and were associated with their phenotypes according to genome-wide significance thresholds. MoBa was not part in any of these GWASs. We used SNPs individually as genetic instruments [10]. SNPs that were used in the analyses are described in Supplemental Tables 1-8. The number of SNPs used in each approach is described in Supplemental Table 9.
Population characteristics
Infertility
Infertility was defined as trying to conceive for ≥12 months or having used assisted reproductive technologies as previously described [5, 6]. The reference group comprised participants who conceived spontaneously within 12 months. Couples with unplanned pregnancies were excluded.
Other variables
We obtained information from both parents on the age at delivery (continuous), years of education (continuous), BMI (continuous), tobacco use (having ever smoked or not), and number of previous deliveries (continuous). We report the maximum values for all continuous variables for those parents who participated in more than one pregnancy in MoBa.
Ethical approval
The MoBa study follows the Declaration of Helsinki for Medical Research involving human subjects. The establishment of MoBa and its initial data collection were based on a license from the Norwegian Data Protection Agency and approved by Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics. The MoBa cohort is now based on the regulations in the Norwegian Health Registry Act. Participants provided written informed consent before joining the cohort. This project was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics of South/East Norway (reference: 2017/1362).
Statistical analyses
We described normally distributed continuous variables by means and SDs, non-normally distributed continuous variables by medians and 1st-3rd quartiles, and categorical variables by proportions. We assessed differences in baseline characteristics between parents with and without infertility by unpaired t-tests (normally distributed variables), Mann-Whitney U-tests (non-normally distributed variables), and chi-squared tests (categorical variables).
We first performed sex specific GWASs of infertility in MoBa using Scalable and Accurate Implementation of GEneralized mixed models (accounting for kinship and adjusted for the first 20 genetic principal components, genotype batch, and age at reported infertility). We then searched for the SNPs linked to the cardiometabolic risk factors in the summary statistics of the infertility GWASs. Palindromic SNPs with allele frequencies close to 0.5 were excluded. After data harmonization, we estimated the association between the risk factor of interest and infertility using a random effects inverse variance weighted method [10]. We corrected our findings for multiple comparisons (8 exposures) by the Bonferroni method (pvalue threshold < 0.00625). Finally, the three key MR assumptions that must be met to obtain valid conclusions in MR analyses [10] (genetic instruments are robustly related to the exposure, there is no confounding of the genetic instrument-outcome associations, and genetic instruments are exclusively linked to the outcome through the exposure of interest) were investigated in detail as described in the Supplemental Methods.
Analyses were conducted in R Software v. 4.1.2. Code for data management and analysis is available in https://github.com/alvarohernaez/MR_cardiometabolic_infertility_MoBa.
RESULTS
Study population
Our study population consisted of 68,882 women (a total of 81,682 pregnancies) and 47,474 men (55,744 pregnancies) (Supplemental Figure 1). Infertility was reported in 12% of the couples. Participants with infertility were older, had lower educational attainment, greater mean BMI values, were more likely to have smoked, and were more likely to be trying for a first pregnancy (Table 1).
Cardiometabolic risk factors and infertility
In women, increases in the genetically determined levels of fasting insulin were related to greater odds of infertility (+1 log(pmol/L): OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.18, p-value = 0.003)
(Figure 1). We found no evidence that this result was affected by weak instrument bias (estimated F-statistic: 52.5) or unbalanced horizontal pleiotropy (MR-Egger intercept test p-value = 0.194; no evidence of between-SNP heterogeneity [Cochran’s Q = 55.8, p-value = 0.445; Rücker’s Q’ = 54.1, p-value = 0.472]; consistency in directionality of estimates in MR sensitivity methods; consistency between main analyses and those only using the genetic variants that were unrelated to other risk factors according to the Steiger filtering) (Supplemental Table 10). Associations of higher maternal fasting glucose and glycated hemoglobin in women (and maybe fasting insulin in men) with greater infertility odds were suggested. However, these relationships were imprecise and did not pass our multiple testing p-value threshold. Lipid and blood pressure associations with infertility were close to the null (Figure 1, Supplemental Table 10).
MR analyses on the relationship of cardiometabolic risk factors with infertility in women and men (units differ for each exposure, results are not directly comparable in magnitude).
DISCUSSION
In this MR analysis, genetic instruments suggest that higher concentrations of fasting insulin increase the risk of infertility in women. An association between higher fasting glucose and glycated hemoglobin in women (and maybe higher fasting insulin in men) and higher risk of infertility is also suggested but analyses in larger numbers of participants are needed to confirm this. Hyperinsulinemia, a marker of insulin resistance, and glucose intolerance are common in women with polycystic ovary syndrome, which is a cause of infertility [11]. Hyperinsulinemia is also linked to follicular dysplasia and impaired synthesis of sexual hormones in the follicle (less progesterone, lower availability of follicle stimulating hormone, and more androgens) [12, 13]. Our findings support hyperinsulinemia as a cause of infertility in women. The lack of robust statistical evidence for an effect of lipids and blood pressure on infertility suggests that previous observational results [1-3] may have been influenced by residual confounding.
Our work has several strengths. MR studies exploring the relationship between cardiometabolic risk factors and a clinical definition of fertility have been lacking. Our findings were based on a relatively homogeneous population, and together with a thorough evaluation of compliance with MR assumptions, our findings appear robust. However, our study has some limitations. First, infertility is a couple-dependent measure. Thus, we could not establish if underlying causes of infertility were in the woman, man, or both. Second, MoBa only recruited couples who had conceived. Therefore, studies with couples who never conceived are warranted. Third, we did not have data on circulating levels of cardiometabolic risk factors in MoBa and there was no GWAS of infertility with available summary data across the genome. Thus, we opted to undertake a GWAS of infertility in MoBa (with no independent replication) and a two-sample MR using summary results from publicly available GWAS of the exposures and those from our MoBa GWAS. Our outcome GWAS is relatively small. Thus, we have highlighted some suggested results that were clinically relevant but did not pass multiple testing. Our findings need replication in two-sample MR using results from a larger GWAS of infertility and/or a large independent sample in which one-sample MR could be undertaken. Fourth, no sex-specific genetic instruments were available in the largest GWASs on cardiometabolic risk factors, and we had to assume that there were no sex differences in the genetic instruments for exposures. However, this assumption may imply a violation of the first MR principle. Finally, the characteristics of our study sample limits the generalizability of our results to other populations, particularly to populations of genetic ancestries other than European.
In conclusion, genetic instruments suggest a role of hyperinsulinemia and possibly glucose intolerance on infertility in women. If further research in larger samples and with sex-specific exposure instruments support our findings, preventing hyperinsulinemia may be a means of reducing fertility problems in women.
Data Availability
The consent given by the participants does not allow for storage of individual data in repositories or journals. Researchers who want access to data sets for replication should apply through datatilgang{at}fhi.no. This process requires approval from the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway and an agreement with MoBa. GWAS summary statistics on fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and fasting insulin have been contributed by the Meta-Analyses of Glucose and Insulin-related traits Consortium investigators and have been downloaded from https://magicinvestigators.org/downloads/ (menu: Trans-ancestry and single-ancestry meta-analysis summary statistics of four glycemic traits). GWAS summary statistics on lipid profile traits have been contributed by the Global Lipids Genetics Consortium investigators and have been downloaded from http://csg.sph.umich.edu/willer/public/glgc-lipids2021/ (menu: Ancestry-specific GWAS summary statistics for HDL-C, LDL-C, nonHDL-C, TC and TG). Finally, GWAS summary statistics on blood pressure have been contributed by Evangelou E et al. and have been downloaded from the Supplemental Tables of the article (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-018-0205-x#MOESM3).
Data availability
The consent given by the participants does not allow for storage of individual data in repositories or journals. Researchers who want access to data sets for replication should apply through datatilgang{at}fhi.no. This process requires approval from the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway and an agreement with MoBa. GWAS summary statistics on fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and fasting insulin have been contributed by the Meta-Analyses of Glucose and Insulin-related traits Consortium investigators and have been downloaded from https://magicinvestigators.org/downloads/ (menu: “Trans-ancestry and single-ancestry meta-analysis summary statistics of four glycemic traits”). GWAS summary statistics on lipid profile traits have been contributed by the Global Lipids Genetics Consortium investigators and have been downloaded from http://csg.sph.umich.edu/willer/public/glgc-lipids2021/ (menu: “Ancestry-specific GWAS summary statistics for HDL-C, LDL-C, nonHDL-C, TC and TG”). Finally, GWAS summary statistics on blood pressure have been contributed by Evangelou E et al. and have been downloaded from the Supplemental Tables of the article (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-018-0205-x#MOESM3).
Funding
The MoBa Cohort Study is supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. This project received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement No 947684). This work was also partly supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme, project number 262700, and the project “Women’s fertility – an essential component of health and well-being”, number 320656, and co-funded by the European Research Council (grant agreement No 101071773). Open Access funding was provided by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. P.R.N. was supported by the European Research Council (grant agreement No 293574). E.C. and A.Havdahl were supported by the Research Council of Norway (274611) and the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (project numbers 2020022, 2021045). D.A.L. is a UK National Institute for Health Research Senior Investigator (NF-SI-0611–10196) and wass supported by the British Heart Foundation (CH/F/20/90003 and AA/18/1/34219) and the European Research Council (grant agreement No 101021566). The funders had no role in the study design; the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication. Views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the funders. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
Authors’ relationships and activities
D.A.L. receives (or has received in the last 10 years) research support from National and International government and charitable bodies, Roche Diagnostics and Medtronic for research unrelated to the current work. O.A.A. is or has been in the last 10 years consultant to HealthLytix. The rest of the authors declare that no competing interests exist.
Contribution statement
A.Hernaez was responsible for data curation, formal analyses, data interpretation, and drafting the article. Y.L. performed data analyses (the temporary GWAS on infertility in MoBa) and critically revised the article. C.M.P. provided support in data analysis, software use, and visualization of results, and critically revised the article. K.H.S. provided support in data analysis, software use, and visualization of results, and critically revised the article. S.E.H. contributed to data acquisition, obtained funding, and critically revised the article. P.M. contributed to data acquisition and critically revised the article. P.R.N. contributed to data acquisition and critically revised the article. O.A.A. contributed to data acquisition and critically revised the article. E.C. contributed to data acquisition and critically revised the article. A.Havdahl contributed to data acquisition and critically revised the article. A.F. was involved in the definition of the methodology of the study and the interpretation of data and critically revised the article. S.B. was involved in the definition of the methodology of the study and the interpretation of data and critically revised the article. D.A.L. was involved in the definition of the methodology of the study and the interpretation of data and critically revised the article. M.C.M. conceived and designed the study, obtained funding, coordinated the project, contributed to data interpretation, and critically revised the article. A.Hernaez and M.C.M. are the guarantors of this study, accept full responsibility for the work and the conduct of the study, had access to the data, and controlled the decision to publish.
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS
SUPPLEMENTAL METHODS
MR assumptions and sensitivity analyses
There are three key assumptions in MR: 1) genetic instruments are robustly related to the exposure, 2) there is no confounding of the genetic instrument-outcome associations, and 3) genetic instruments are exclusively linked to the outcome through the exposure of interest. If violated, MR conclusions may be invalid [1].
In relation to the first assumption, we estimated the robustness of our genetic instruments as the mean F-statistic (average beta2/standard error2 across all SNPs; F-statistics < 10 suggest a weak genetic instrument) [1]. Regarding the second assumption, we reduced the potential confounding of the genetic instrument-outcome association due to population stratification by: 1) selecting our genetic instruments from GWASs performed in populations of European ancestry; 2) conducting MR analyses using GWASs adjusted for genetic principal components [2].
Genetic instruments that are related to other risk factors for the outcome different than the exposure of interest (horizontal pleiotropy) violate the third MR assumption [3]. We checked the presence of horizontal pleiotropy by procedures based on sensitivity MR methods (MR-Egger, weighted median, and weighted mode) [4]. It can be identified if: 1) a non-zero intercept is present in the MR-Egger method; 2) there is no concordance among MR estimates in inverse variance weighted and the alternative methods; 3) and between SNP heterogeneity is found according to the Cochran’s Qand the Rücker’s Q’ [4]. Some associations were affected by horizontal pleiotropy, possibly due to the high inter-relation among cardiometabolic risk factors. We thus used the Steiger filtering to determine which SNPs explain more variation in our exposure of interest than in the rest of variables related to it (these SNPs are less susceptible of biasing findings due to horizontal pleiotropy) [4]. For example, 71 of the SNPs for fasting glucose explained more variability in fasting glucose than in the other risk factors considered (the rest of risk factors [glycated hemoglobin, fasting insulin, LDL-C, HDL-C, triglycerides, SBP, DBP] plus BMI and ever smoking) and were retained after the filtering. We repeated MR analyses using exclusively the SNPs that passed the filtering process.
SUPPLEMENTAL TABLES
SNPs included in fasting glucose-related analyses.
SNPs included in glycated hemoglobin-related analyses.
SNPs included in fasting insulin-related analyses.
SNPs included in LDL cholesterol-related analyses.
SNPs included in HDL cholesterol-related analyses.
SNPs included in triglyceride-related analyses.
SNPs included in systolic blood pressure-related analyses.
SNPs included in diastolic blood pressure-related analyses.
Number of genetic variants used in all analyses
Sensitivity analyses on the verification of Mendelian randomization assumptions.
SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURES
Study flow chart.
Acknowledgements
The MoBa Cohort Study is supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Ministry of Education and Research. We are grateful to all the families in Norway who take part in this cohort study, those who contributed to the recruitment, and the infrastructure surrounding the MoBa cohort.
We thank Per Magnus, Pål R. Njølstad, Ole Andreassen, and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health for generating high-quality genomic data. This research is part of the HARVEST collaboration, supported by the Research Council of Norway (#229624). We also thank the NORMENT Centre for providing genotype data, funded by the Research Council of Norway (grant #223273), South East Norway Health Authority, Stiftelsen Kristian Gerhard Jebsen, and deCODE Genetics. We further thank the Center for Diabetes Research (University of Bergen) for providing genotype information and performing quality control and imputation of the data, in the context of research projects funded by the European Research Council Advanced Grant SELECTionPREDISPOSED (#293574), Stiftelsen Kristian Gerhard Jebsen (Translational Medical Center), the Trond Mohn Foundation, the Research Council of Norway (FRIPRO grant #240413), the Novo Nordisk Foundation (grant #54741), the Bergen Research Foundation (“Utilizing the Mother and Child Cohort and the Medical Birth Registry for Better Health”), the University of Bergen, the Western Norway Health Authority (Strategic Fund “Personalized Medicine for Children and Adults”), and the Norwegian Diabetes Association.
This work was performed on the TSD (Tjeneste for Sensitive Data) facilities, owned by the University of Oslo, which are operated and developed by the TSD service group at the IT-Department in the University of Oslo (tsd-drift{at}usit.uio.no).
ABBREVIATIONS
- DBP
- diastolic blood pressure
- GWAS
- genome-wide association study
- HDL-C
- high-density lipoprotein cholesterol
- LDL-C
- low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
- MoBa
- Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study
- MR
- Mendelian randomization
- SBP
- systolic blood pressure
REFERENCES
