RESUMEN
A growing body of evidence suggests that vitamin D deficiency has been associated with an increased susceptibility to viral and bacterial respiratory infections. In this study, we aimed to examine the association between vitamin D and COVID-19 risk and outcomes. We used logistic regression to identify associations between vitamin D variables and COVID-19 (risk of infection, hospitalisation and death) in 417,342 participants from UK Biobank. We subsequently performed a Mendelian Randomisation (MR) study to look for evidence of a causal effect. In total, 1746 COVID-19 cases (399 deaths) were registered between March and June 2020. We found no significant associations between COVID-19 infection risk and measured 25-OHD levels after adjusted for covariates, but this finding is limited by the fact that the vitamin D levels were measured on average 11 years before the pandemic. Ambient UVB was strongly and inversely associated with COVID-19 hospitalization and death overall and consistently after stratification by BMI and ethnicity. We also observed an interaction that suggested greater protective effect of genetically-predicted vitamin D levels when ambient UVB radiation is stronger. The main MR analysis did not show that genetically-predicted vitamin D levels are causally associated with COVID-19 risk (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.55-1.11, P = 0.160), but MR sensitivity analyses indicated a potential causal effect (weighted mode MR: OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.95, P = 0.021; weighted median MR: OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.92, P = 0.016). Analysis of MR-PRESSO did not find outliers for any instrumental variables and suggested a potential causal effect (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.98, p-val = 0.030). In conclusion, the effect of vitamin D levels on the risk or severity of COVID-19 remains controversial, further studies are needed to validate vitamin D supplementation as a means of protecting against worsened COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/patología , Calcifediol/sangre , Anciano , Bancos de Muestras Biológicas , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/virología , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Análisis de la Aleatorización Mendeliana , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
Several associations between non-genetic biomarkers and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk have been detected, but the strength of evidence and the direction of associations are not confirmed. We aimed to evaluate the evidence of these associations and integrate results from different approaches to assess causal inference. We searched Medline and Embase for meta-analyses of observational studies, meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and Mendelian randomization (MR) studies measuring the associations between non-genetic biomarkers and CRC risk and meta-analyses of RCTs on supplementary micronutrients. We repeated the meta-analyses using random-effects models and categorized the evidence based on predefined criteria. We described each MR study and evaluated their credibility. Seventy-two meta-analyses of observational studies and 18 MR studies on non-genetic biomarkers and six meta-analyses of RCTs on micronutrient intake and CRC risk considering 65, 42, and five unique associations, respectively, were identified. No meta-analyses of RCTs on blood level biomarkers have been found. None of the associations were classified as convincing or highly suggestive, three were classified as suggestive, and 26 were classified as weak. For three biomarkers explored in MR studies, there was evidence of causality and seven were classified as likely noncausal. For the first time, results from both observational and MR studies were integrated by triangulating the evidence for a wide variety of non-genetic biomarkers and CRC risk. At blood level, lower vitamin D, higher homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance, and human papillomavirus infection were associated with higher CRC risk while increased linoleic acid and oleic acid and decreased arachidonic acid were likely causally associated with lower CRC risk. No association was found convincing in both study types.
Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/sangre , Neoplasias Colorrectales/etiología , Ácido Araquidónico/sangre , Neoplasias Colorrectales/sangre , Neoplasias Colorrectales/virología , Infecciones por Helicobacter , Helicobacter pylori , Humanos , Resistencia a la Insulina , Ácido Linoleico/sangre , Análisis de la Aleatorización Mendeliana , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Micronutrientes/administración & dosificación , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto , Ácido Oléico/sangre , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/complicaciones , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Riesgo , Vitamina D/sangreRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent across the globe. Existing studies suggest that a low vitamin D level is associated with more than 130 outcomes. Exploring the causal role of vitamin D in health outcomes could support or question vitamin D supplementation. METHODS: We carried out a systematic literature review of previous Mendelian-randomization studies on vitamin D. We then implemented a Mendelian Randomization-Phenome Wide Association Study (MR-PheWAS) analysis on data from 339 256 individuals of White British origin from UK Biobank. We first ran a PheWAS analysis to test the associations between a 25(OH)D polygenic risk score and 920 disease outcomes, and then nine phenotypes (i.e. systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, risk of hypertension, T2D, ischaemic heart disease, body mass index, depression, non-vertebral fracture and all-cause mortality) that met the pre-defined inclusion criteria for further analysis were examined by multiple MR analytical approaches to explore causality. RESULTS: The PheWAS analysis did not identify any health outcome associated with the 25(OH)D polygenic risk score. Although a selection of nine outcomes were reported in previous Mendelian-randomization studies or umbrella reviews to be associated with vitamin D, our MR analysis, with substantial study power (>80% power to detect an association with an odds ratio >1.2 for per standard deviation increase of log-transformed 25[OH]D), was unable to support an interpretation of causal association. CONCLUSIONS: We investigated the putative causal effects of vitamin D on multiple health outcomes in a White population. We did not support a causal effect on any of the disease outcomes tested. However, we cannot exclude small causal effects or effects on outcomes that we did not have enough power to explore due to the small number of cases.
Asunto(s)
Deficiencia de Vitamina D/epidemiología , Deficiencia de Vitamina D/genética , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Bancos de Muestras Biológicas , Presión Sanguínea , Índice de Masa Corporal , Bases de Datos Factuales , Depresión/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Femenino , Fracturas Óseas/epidemiología , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Estudio de Asociación del Genoma Completo , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Humanos , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Masculino , Análisis de la Aleatorización Mendeliana , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mortalidad , Isquemia Miocárdica/epidemiología , Fenotipo , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple , Sexismo , Factores Socioeconómicos , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Whilst observational studies establish that lower plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) levels are associated with higher risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), establishing causality has proven challenging. Since vitamin D is modifiable, these observations have substantial clinical and public health implications. Indeed, many health agencies already recommend supplemental vitamin D. Here, we explore causality in a large Mendelian randomisation (MR) study using an improved genetic instrument for circulating 25-OHD. METHODS: We developed a weighted genetic score for circulating 25-OHD using six genetic variants that we recently reported to be associated with circulating 25-OHD in a large genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis. Using this score as instrumental variable in MR analyses, we sought to determine whether circulating 25-OHD is causally linked with CRC risk. We conducted MR analysis using individual-level data from 10,725 CRC cases and 30,794 controls (Scotland, UK Biobank and Croatia). We then applied estimates from meta-analysis of 11 GWAS of CRC risk (18,967 cases; 48,168 controls) in a summary statistics MR approach. RESULTS: The new genetic score for 25-OHD was strongly associated with measured plasma 25-OHD levels in 2821 healthy Scottish controls (P = 1.47 × 10- 11), improving upon previous genetic instruments (F-statistic 46.0 vs. 13.0). However, individual-level MR revealed no association between 25-OHD score and CRC risk (OR 1.03/unit log-transformed circulating 25-OHD, 95% CI 0.51-2.07, P = 0.93). Similarly, we found no evidence for a causal relationship between 25-OHD and CRC risk using summary statistics MR analysis (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69-1.19, P = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the scale of this study and employing an improved score capturing more of the genetic contribution to circulating 25-OHD, we found no evidence for a causal relationship between circulating 25-OHD and CRC risk. Although the magnitude of effect for vitamin D suggested by observational studies can confidently be excluded, smaller effects sizes and non-linear relationships remain plausible. Circulating vitamin D may be a CRC biomarker, but a causal effect on CRC risk remains unproven.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/etiología , Análisis de la Aleatorización Mendeliana/métodos , Vitamina D/análogos & derivados , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo , Vitamina D/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over half of the patients were diagnosed with colorectal cancer after 70 years of age. The choice of the most suitable chemotherapy strategy is the major challenge for elderly patients. Previous trials indicated that elderly patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer obtained no significant benefits from oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, single-agent oral capecitabine is regarded as an effective alternative with retained efficacy and improved flexibility. However, the optimal dose of capecitabine for elderly patients remains controversial. Recent studies have adopted a low-dose strategy (1,000 mg/m(2)) for elderly patients, but the long-term efficacy of this strategy has not been identified so far. Thus, we designed this trial to investigate non-inferiority of the lower-dose strategy of capecitabine compared with the approved-dose strategy for adjuvant chemotherapy of elderly patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer. METHODS: LC-ACEC (Low-dose Capecitabine Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Elderly Patients With Stage II/III Colorectal Cancer) is a prospective, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial including 926 eligible patients. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive a capecitabine adjuvant chemotherapy strategy of lower dose (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 of every 21 days) or approved dose (1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 of every 21 days). The primary outcome is 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes include 3-year overall survival, toxic and side effects during treatment, completion rate, and quality of life. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a low-dose strategy of capecitabine in adjuvant chemotherapy of elderly patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer, and the results are believed to provide new evidence on the treatment of elderly patients with colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02316535 (Dec. 12, 2014).