New Insight into the Role of Vitamin D in the Stroke Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Stratified Data by 25(OH)D Levels.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Current vascular pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.2174/0115701611331890241007112502
Maria Fusaro, Raffaele De Caterina, Giovanni Tripepi
{"title":"New Insight into the Role of Vitamin D in the Stroke Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Stratified Data by 25(OH)D Levels.","authors":"Maria Fusaro, Raffaele De Caterina, Giovanni Tripepi","doi":"10.2174/0115701611331890241007112502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mendelian Randomization (MR) studies have emerged as a powerful tool for investigating causal relationships between modifiable risk factors and clinical outcomes, using genetic variants as instrumental variables. In the context of vitamin D research, MR is a promising approach to elucidate the effects of vitamin D on various health outcomes, including adverse cardiovascular events. However, the validity of MR analyses relies heavily on the strength of the genetic associations found. \"Weak instrument bias\", arising from instruments with low explanatory power for the exposure of interest, can lead to biased estimates and compromise causal inference. We have, herein, briefly reviewed the challenges posed by weak instrument bias in a large MR study on vitamin D [25(OH)D] and stroke, exploring implications for the study's validity and reliability of findings. We have then added an original meta-analysis stratified by 25(OH)D levels. By using aggregated data from a recent MR study, an original meta-analysis stratified by population mean levels of 25(OH)D has indicated that interventions based on vitamin D supplementations in population mean levels ranging from 50 to 70 nmol/L are likely to translate into a 13% reduction of stroke risk (pooled odds ratio=0.873, 95% CI: 0.764-0.997, p-value=0.04). MR studies are a valuable approach for discerning causal relationships between exposures, such as vitamin D, and health outcomes. However, the effectiveness of MR analyses depends on the robustness of the genetic instruments employed. By recognizing and addressing weak instrument bias in MR studies of vitamin D, researchers can enhance the credibility and utility of causal inference in understanding the health effects of this essential nutrient. A metaanalysis stratified by population mean levels of 25(OH)D has revealed the potential benefits of targeted interventions with vitamin D supplementations for stroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":11278,"journal":{"name":"Current vascular pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current vascular pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115701611331890241007112502","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mendelian Randomization (MR) studies have emerged as a powerful tool for investigating causal relationships between modifiable risk factors and clinical outcomes, using genetic variants as instrumental variables. In the context of vitamin D research, MR is a promising approach to elucidate the effects of vitamin D on various health outcomes, including adverse cardiovascular events. However, the validity of MR analyses relies heavily on the strength of the genetic associations found. "Weak instrument bias", arising from instruments with low explanatory power for the exposure of interest, can lead to biased estimates and compromise causal inference. We have, herein, briefly reviewed the challenges posed by weak instrument bias in a large MR study on vitamin D [25(OH)D] and stroke, exploring implications for the study's validity and reliability of findings. We have then added an original meta-analysis stratified by 25(OH)D levels. By using aggregated data from a recent MR study, an original meta-analysis stratified by population mean levels of 25(OH)D has indicated that interventions based on vitamin D supplementations in population mean levels ranging from 50 to 70 nmol/L are likely to translate into a 13% reduction of stroke risk (pooled odds ratio=0.873, 95% CI: 0.764-0.997, p-value=0.04). MR studies are a valuable approach for discerning causal relationships between exposures, such as vitamin D, and health outcomes. However, the effectiveness of MR analyses depends on the robustness of the genetic instruments employed. By recognizing and addressing weak instrument bias in MR studies of vitamin D, researchers can enhance the credibility and utility of causal inference in understanding the health effects of this essential nutrient. A metaanalysis stratified by population mean levels of 25(OH)D has revealed the potential benefits of targeted interventions with vitamin D supplementations for stroke.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
维生素 D 对中风风险作用的新认识:按 25(OH)D 水平进行分层数据的 Meta 分析。
孟德尔随机化(Mendelian Randomization,MR)研究是研究可改变的风险因素与临床结果之间因果关系的有力工具,它使用基因变异作为工具变量。在维生素 D 研究方面,孟德尔随机化是一种很有前景的方法,可用于阐明维生素 D 对各种健康结果(包括不良心血管事件)的影响。然而,MR 分析的有效性在很大程度上取决于所发现的遗传关联的强度。"弱工具偏差 "是由对相关暴露解释力低的工具引起的,它可能导致有偏差的估计值,并影响因果推断。在此,我们简要回顾了在一项关于维生素 D [25(OH)D] 与中风的大型 MR 研究中,弱工具偏倚所带来的挑战,探讨了其对研究结果的有效性和可靠性的影响。然后,我们增加了一项按 25(OH)D 水平分层的原创性荟萃分析。通过使用最近一项 MR 研究的汇总数据,一项按人群 25(OH)D 平均水平分层的原创荟萃分析表明,在人群平均水平为 50 至 70 nmol/L 的范围内补充维生素 D 的干预措施可能会使中风风险降低 13%(汇总几率比=0.873,95% CI:0.764-0.997,p 值=0.04)。磁共振研究是辨别维生素 D 等暴露与健康结果之间因果关系的重要方法。然而,MR 分析的有效性取决于所采用的遗传工具的稳健性。通过识别和解决维生素 D MR 研究中的弱工具偏差,研究人员可以提高因果推断的可信度和实用性,从而了解这种必需营养素对健康的影响。一项按人群 25(OH)D 平均水平分层的荟萃分析揭示了有针对性地补充维生素 D 干预对中风的潜在益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current vascular pharmacology
Current vascular pharmacology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
4.40%
发文量
54
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Current Vascular Pharmacology publishes clinical and research-based reviews/mini-reviews, original research articles, letters, debates, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited issues to update all those concerned with the treatment of vascular disease, bridging the gap between clinical practice and ongoing research. Vascular disease is the commonest cause of death in Westernized countries and its incidence is on the increase in developing countries. It follows that considerable research is directed at establishing effective treatment for acute vascular events. Long-term treatment has also received considerable attention (e.g. for symptomatic relief). Furthermore, effective prevention, whether primary or secondary, is backed by the findings of several landmark trials. Vascular disease is a complex field with primary care physicians and nurse practitioners as well as several specialties involved. The latter include cardiology, vascular and cardio thoracic surgery, general medicine, radiology, clinical pharmacology and neurology (stroke units).
期刊最新文献
The Systemic Immune Inflammation Index as a Novel Predictive Biomarker for Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury Risk Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. Neutrophil Migration is a Crucial Factor in Wound Healing and the Pathogenesis of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Insights into Pharmacological Interventions. Efficacy and Safety of Sarpogrelate on Symptom Improvement in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) and/or Being at Risk of PAD: A Single Arm, Multi-Centered, Open-Label Trial. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Cardiovascular Disease. New Insight into the Role of Vitamin D in the Stroke Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Stratified Data by 25(OH)D Levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1