ABSTRACT
Objectives To estimate the shape of the causal relationship between body mass index (BMI) and mortality risk in a Mendelian randomization framework.
Design Mendelian randomization analyses of two prospective population-based cohorts.
Setting Individuals of European ancestries living in Norway or the United Kingdom.
Participants 56,150 participants from the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT) in Norway and 366,385 participants from UK Biobank recruited by postal invitation.
Outcomes All-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality (cardiovascular, cancer, non-cardiovascular non-cancer).
Results A previously published non-linear Mendelian randomization analysis of these data using the residual stratification method suggested a J-shaped association between genetically-predicted BMI and mortality outcomes with the lowest mortality risk at a BMI of around 25 kg/m2. However, the “constant genetic effect” assumption required by this method is violated. The re-analysis of these data using the more reliable doubly-ranked stratification method still indicated a J-shaped relationship, but with less precision in estimates at the lower end of the BMI distribution. Evidence for a harmful effect of reducing BMI at low BMI levels was only present in some analyses, and where present, only below 20 kg/m2. A harmful effect of increasing BMI for all-cause mortality was evident above 25 kg/m2, for cardiovascular mortality above 24 kg/m2, for non-cardiovascular non-cancer mortality above 26 kg/m2, and for cancer mortality above 30 kg/m2. In UK Biobank, the association between genetically-predicted BMI and mortality at high BMI levels was stronger in women than in men.
Conclusion This research challenges findings from previous conventional observational epidemiology and Mendelian randomization investigations that the lowest level of mortality risk is at a BMI level of around 25 kg/m2. Our results provide evidence that reductions in BMI will only increase mortality risk for a small proportion of the population, and increases in BMI will increase mortality risk for those with BMI above 25 kg/m2.
Strengths and limitations of the study
Mendelian randomization design minimizes bias due to confounding and reverse causation
Large sample sizes enable powerful analyses even in low BMI individuals
Validity of the genetic variants as instrumental variables cannot be verified
Bias due to selection could be non-negligible and could vary across strata
All estimates are averaged across a stratum of the population; individual effects of raising or lowering BMI may vary between individuals
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 225790/Z/22/Z), the United Kingdom Research and Innovation Medical Research Council (grant number MC_UU_00002/7), the British Heart Foundation (RG/18/13/33946) and the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014; NIHR203312). YQS was supported by a researcher grant from The Liaison Committee for Education, Research and Innovation in Central Norway (project ID 2018/42794). AMM is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Blood and Transplant Research Unit (BTRU) in Donor Health and Behaviour (NIHR203337). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHSBT or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding statement: This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 225790/Z/22/Z), the United Kingdom Research and Innovation Medical Research Council (grant number MC_UU_00002/7), the British Heart Foundation (RG/18/13/33946) and the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014; NIHR203312). YQS was supported by a researcher grant from The Liaison Committee for Education, Research and Innovation in Central Norway (project ID 2018/42794). AMM is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Blood and Transplant Research Unit (BTRU) in Donor Health and Behaviour (NIHR203337). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHSBT or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Competing interest statement: None declared.
Data Availability
This study has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource. Data are not publicly available due to ethical reasons. UK Biobank data are accessible on application to any bona fide researcher. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
