SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Causal effects for neurodegenerative diseases on the risk of myocardial infarction: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.

Aging (Albany NY) · 2024-06-07

DOI: 10.18632/aging.205909PMID: 38850523

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Several studies have demonstrated a correlation between neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) and myocardial infarction (MI), yet the precise causal relationship between these remains elusive. This study aimed to investigate the potential causal associations of genetically predicted Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson's disease (PD), and multiple sclerosis (MS) with MI using two-sample Mendelian randomization (TSMR). Various methods, including inverse variance weighted (IVW), weighted median (WM), MR-Egger regression, weighted mode, and simple mode, were employed to estimate the effects of genetically predicted NDDs on MI. To validate the analysis, we assessed pleiotropic effects, heterogeneity, and conducted leave-one-out sensitivity analysis. We identified that genetic predisposition to NDDs was suggestively associated with higher odds of MI (OR_IVW=1.07, OR_MR-Egger=1.08, OR_WM=1.07, OR_weighted mode=1.07, OR_simple mode=1.10, all P0.05). Additionally, results from MRPRESSO and leave-one-out sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the causal effect estimations for genetically predicted AD, DLB, PD, and MS on MI. This study provides further support for the causal effects of AD on MI and, for the first time, establishes robust causal evidence for the detrimental effect of DLB on the risk of MI. Our findings emphasize the importance of monitoring the cardiovascular function of the elderly experiencing neurodegenerative changes.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.