Next Article in Journal
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Antenatal Corticosteroid Therapy—A Narrative Review of Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes
Previous Article in Journal
Psychometric Properties of the German Version of the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire in Adolescents after Traumatic Brain Injury and Their Proxies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 12
Issue 1
10.3390/jcm12010320
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Causal Relationships of General and Abdominal Adiposity on Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study

by
Leifeng Lyu
1,
Yuanqing Cai
1,
Mofan Xiao
2,
Jialin Liang
1,
Guangyang Zhang
1,
Zhaopu Jing
1,
Rupeng Zhang
1 and
Xiaoqian Dang
1,*
1
Department of Orthopaedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, NO. 157, Xiwu Road, Xi’an 710004, China
2
Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710061, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(1), 320; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010320
Submission received: 8 November 2022 / Revised: 9 December 2022 / Accepted: 28 December 2022 / Published: 31 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section General Surgery)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Adiposity is closely related to osteoarthritis, but the causal effects of different types of adiposity on osteoarthritis are indistinct. This study conducted a Mendelian Randomization (MR) analysis for the causal effects of general adiposity and abdominal adiposity on knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and hip osteoarthritis (HOA). Methods: The general adiposity was assessed by body mass index (BMI), while the abdominal adiposity was evaluated with waist circumference (WC), hip circumference (HC), and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR). The data used in this two-sample MR analysis originated from genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Significant (p < 5 × 10−8) and independent (r2 < 0.01) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were selected as instrumental variables for the MR analysis. Subsequently, this study used the inverse variance weighted, weighted median, and other methods for the causal inference, and the results were presented as odds ratios (OR). Moreover, sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the stability and reliability of the results. Results: The MR results revealed positive causal effects of BMI on KOA (OR: 1.694; 95% CI: from 1.492 to 1.923; p = 3.96 × 10−16) and HOA (OR: 1.412; 95% CI: from 1.196 to 1.666; p = 4.58 × 10−5). Additionally, WC and HC both positively and causally related to KOA (WC: OR: 1.827; 95% CI: from 1.564 to 2.134; p = 2.68 × 10−14; HC: OR: 1.610; 95% CI: from 1.357 to 1.912; p = 5.03 × 10−8) and HOA (WC: OR: 1.491; 95% CI: from 1.254 to 1.772; p = 5.85 × 10−6; HC: OR: 1.439; 95% CI: from 1.205 to 1.719; p = 5.82 × 10−5). However, no causal relationship existed between WHR and obesity. These results were robust according to the sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: This study indicated that both general and abdominal obesity had positive causal effects on knee osteoarthritis and hip osteoarthritis.

1. Introduction

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common degenerative disease of joints involving a complex process composed of inflammatory and metabolic factors, which might lead to loss of articular cartilage, synovitis, subchondral bone sclerosis, and osteophyte formation [1,2]. Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and hip osteoarthritis (HOA) are the most common types of OA. It is estimated that KOA and HOA are the 11th highest contributors to global disability and the 4th in aging populations [3]. Even though a large number of scholars are increasingly focused on OA, the pathogenesis of OA is still unclear. The risk factors, including obesity, inflammation, bone metabolism, and muscle strength, could affect the incidence of osteoarthritis [4]. According to the former study, nearly 30% of over 45 years old individuals had radiographic evidence of KOA, and almost half of them had knee symptoms, which brought a large burden on society [5].
Obesity is defined as excessive fat accumulation that might impair health and is diagnosed at a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 [6]. The prevalence of obesity has increased worldwide to pandemic proportions in the past 50 years and caused plenty of problems [7]. A cohort study showed that obesity could increase the risk of hand, hip, and knee OA and contained a dose-response gradient with increasing BMI [8]. Devyani et al. also found obesity was associated with knee OA risk, and it could promote inflammatory processes implicated in the pathogenesis of OA so that the prevalence of OA increased with obesity [2,9]. Generally speaking, it might be inaccurate to evaluate obesity just by BMI levels due to the existence of abdominal obesity. The evidence showed that combining the BMI and body shape anthropometric traits such as waist circumference (WC), hip circumference (HC), and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) could be more effective when assessing obesity [10]. However, the existing studies did not combine BMI and body shape traits to judge the level of obesity and could not identify the causality between obesity and OA comprehensively.
Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis is a powerful method that takes genetic variants as instrumental variables (IVs) to assess the causality between exposures and outcomes by imitating the randomized controlled trial [11,12]. Since genotypes appear before the occur of disease and are largely unrelated to lifestyle or environmental factors after birth, the MR method could minimize the confounders and avoid reverse causality [13]. Thus, MR has been widely used in causal inference in various research. In this study, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were chosen as the IVs to perform a bidirectional MR analysis without causal relationships between obesity (BMI, WC, HC, and WHR) and osteoarthritis (KOA and HOA).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

The study design is shown in Figure 1. Three assumptions should be met when performing MR analysis. Assumption 1. The SNPs should be closely related to exposures. Assumption 2. The SNPs selected should be independent of confounders. Assumption 3. The SNPs should affect results only through exposure but not the direct correlation. As mentioned earlier, this study took the SNPs as to IVs to conduct a bidirectional two-sample MR analysis to evaluate the causal relationships between BMI, WC, HC, WHR, and osteoarthritis.

2.2. Data Source

The data used in MR analysis came from the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) datasets. The selection of BMI-associated genetic predictors originated from the GIANT Consortium based on GWAS with 322,154 individuals and 2,554,668 SNPs of European ancestry [14]. Additionally, the genetic variants for WC and HC, respectively, brought 232,101 (2,565,408 SNPs) and 73,137 (2,738,303 SNPs) European individuals from GIANT Consortium into the study [15]. Moreover, WHR genetic predictors were also obtained from a published GWAS dataset of GIANT, which was icon h based on 118,003 European participants and 2,466,102 SNPs [15]. Genetic predictors of osteoarthritis were obtained from UK Biobank and arcOGEN resources, which contained 403,124 individuals for KOA (24,955 knee osteoarthritis cases and 378,169 controls) and 393,873 subjects for HOA (15,704 hip osteoarthritis cases and 378,169 controls). Previous researchers had elucidated the details of the data used for KOA and HOA [16]. The data about osteoarthritis were from European ancestry. All datasets are available at the publicly available GWAS datasets (https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk (accessed on 7 November 2022)).

2.3. Selection of Instrumental Variables

In this study, the SNPs were selected as the IVs to conduct a Two-sample MR analysis. Genome-wide significant (p < 5 × 10−8) SNPs were extracted as IVs. Then, the linkage disequilibrium (LD) was tested to ensure that the SNPs were independent (r2 < 0.01) and that they would be excluded if containing linkage disequilibrium. All the SNPs that might be associated with the confounding factors were removed. Finally, the F-statistics were calculated, and weak IVs were excluded at F < 10.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The inverse variance weighted (IVW), weighted median and MR-Egger were mainly used to assess the causal associations between BMI, WC, HC, WHR, and OA. The IVW method analyzes each Wald ratio and provides a consistent estimate of the causal effect when all instrumental variables are valid [17]. The weighted median method gives unbiased estimates even when up to 50% of the information comes from invalid instrumental variables [18]. The MR-Egger intercept was conducted to test horizontal pleiotropy. However, this study concentrated on the effect size rather than the statistical significance of MR-Egger, for the statistical power is low [19]. Simple mode and Weighted mode methods were also used to evaluate the causal relationships between obesity and osteoarthritis.
Additionally, Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics were used to assess the heterogeneity. Then, we performed the MR-Egger intercept to test the pleiotropy. To evaluate the effectiveness and stability of MR results, this study then conducted the sensitivity analysis using the ‘leave-one-out’ sensitivity test.
All statistical analyses were performed by the ‘Two-Sample MR’ package in R (version 4.2.1) software. The results were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. The additional ethical approval or consent to participate was not required in the research on account that the analysis was based on existing publications.

3. Results

3.1. Selected SNPs for This Study

Firstly, this study selected BMI and body shape anthropometric traits (WC, HC, and WHR) as risk factors to conduct the MR analysis on OA. Then osteoarthritis was taken as a risk factor, while obesity traits were treated as outcomes to perform MR analyses. The significant and independent SNPs were extracted (p < 5 × 10−8, r2 < 0.01), and the weak IVs were excluded (F < 10), then the rest SNPs were chosen for further MR analysis. The information on the selected SNPs used for MR analysis was listed in Supplementary Tables S1–S8. For the osteoarthritis outcome, there were 77 BMI-related SNPs with a mean of F = 55.94, 42 WC-related SNPs with a mean of F = 50.17, 51 HC-related SNPs with a mean of F = 47.98, and 20 WHR-related SNPs with a mean of F = 46.40 selected for MR analysis.

3.2. Causal Relationships between Body Mass Index and Osteoarthritis

The MR results of BMI on KOA were listed in Table 1 and Figure 2, which were reported as odds ratios (OR). The IVW method showed that BMI had a positive causal effect on KOA (OR: 1.694; 95% CI: from 1.492 to 1.923; p = 3.96 × 10−16); similar results were obtained from the Weighted median (OR: 1.615; 95% CI: from 1.403 to 1.860; p = 2.57 × 10−11) method. According to Cochran’s Q, I2, and MR-Egger intercept test, there was heterogeneity (Q = 155.92, p = 1.88 × 10−7; I2 = 51.26%) but no pleiotropy (intercept = 0.008, p = 0.120) in the results. Then the ‘leave-one-out’ sensitivity indicated that the causal effect of BMI on KOA was not affected by individual SNPs (Figure 2C), which means the results were stable and reliable. Additionally, this study conducted MR analyses between BMI and HOA; the results are listed in Table 2 and Figure 3. With a 1 standard deviation (SD) increase in BMI, the risk of HOA increases to approximately 1.4–1.9 times based on IVW (OR: 1.412; 95% CI: from 1.196 to 1.666; p = 4.58 × 10−5), Weighted median (OR: 1.477; 95% CI: from 1.225 to 1.782; p = 4.54 × 10−5) and MR-Egger (OR: 1.864; 95% CI: from 1.144 to 3.035; p = 0.014). Cochran’s Q Statistic showed there was heterogeneity in the results (Q = 169.21, p = 4.73 × 10−9). The positive causal effect of BMI on HOA was not affected by the directional pleiotropy (intercept = −0.008, p = 0.239) or single SNP (Figure 3).

3.3. Causal Relationships between Waist Circumference and Osteoarthritis

Then the causal relationships between waist circumference and osteoarthritis were also analyzed. Table 1, Figure 4, and Figure S1 showed the results of the MR analysis of WC on KOA. The IVW (OR: 1.827; 95% CI: from 1.564 to 2.134; p = 2.68 × 10−14), Weighted median (OR: 1.576; 95% CI: from 1.315 to 1.889; p = 8.65 × 10−7) methods demonstrated that WC had a positive causal effect on KOA. There was heterogeneity (Q = 72.99, p = 0.002) but no pleiotropy (intercept = 0.007, p = 0.334), and the ‘leave-one-out’ analysis indicated that the results were stable and reliable (Figure S1C). Moreover, similar relationships were obtained based on the MR results about WC and HOA (Table 2, Figure 4 and Figure S2). The IVW method showed a positive causal effect of WC on HOA (OR: 1.491; 95% CI: from 1.254 to 1.772; p = 5.85 × 10−6). Weighted median (OR: 1.514; 95% CI: from 1.205 to 1.902; p = 3.7 × 10−4) and MR-Egger (OR: 2.343; 95% CI: from 1.301 to 4.221; p = 0.007) also supported the results. Cochran’s Q Statistic indicated the heterogeneity in the results (Q = 57.54, p = 0.045). No pleiotropy (intercept = −0.012, p = 0.124) or the SNPs that affected the results was observed (Figure S2C).

3.4. Causal Relationships between Hip Circumference and Osteoarthritis

As for the relationships between HC and KOA, the MR results are shown in Table 1, Figure 4, and Figure S3. The IVW (OR: 1.610; 95% CI: from 1.357 to 1.912; p = 5.03 × 10−8) and Weighted median (OR: 1.616; 95% CI: from 1.371 to 1.903; p = 9.78 × 10−9) indicated a positive causal effect of HC on KOA. There was heterogeneity (Q = 135.41, p = 4.96 × 10−10; I2 = 63.81%) but no pleiotropy (intercept = −0.002, p = 0.862) observed in the causal relationship. The ‘leave-one-out’ analysis revealed that the results were not affected by individual SNPs. Additionally, the study results concerning HC and HOA listed in Table 2, Figure 4, and Figure S4 demonstrated that HC had a positive causal relationship with HOA based on the IVW (OR: 1.439; 95% CI: from 1.205 to 1.719; p = 5.82 × 10−5) and Weighted median (OR: 1.428; 95% CI: from 1.164 to 1.752; p = 6.29 × 10−4). Heterogeneity existed in the causal effect between HC and HOA (Q = 92.43, p = 1.75 × 10−4). There was no pleiotropy (intercept = −0.004, p = 0.697) observed in the research. The ‘leave-one-out’ test in Figure S4C showed that no single SNP would influence the results.

3.5. Causal Relationships between Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Osteoarthritis

At last, we conducted the MR analyses between waist-to-hip ratio and osteoarthritis. The results of WHR and KOA are listed in Table 1. However, the MR analysis indicated a null causal effect of WHR on KOA by IVW (OR: 1.121; 95% CI: from 0.917 to 1.371; p = 0.264), Weighted median (OR: 1.088; 95% CI: from 0.878 to 1.350; p = 0.440), MR-Egger (OR: 1.103; 95% CI: 0.287 to 4.009; p = 0.918) and the other methods. Moreover, the causal associations between WHR and HOA were also assessed. According to the results in Table 2, the IVW (OR: 1.216; 95% CI: from 0.961 to 1.539; p = 0.103), Weighted median (OR: 1.128; 95% CI: from 0.869 to 1.465; p = 0.364) and MR-Egger (OR: 0.598; 95% CI: from 0.132 to 2.704; p = 0.513) all detected a no causal effect of WHR on HOA. In total, there was no causal relationship between the waist-to-hip ratio and osteoarthritis.

4. Discussion

This study aimed to explore the relationships between obesity and osteoarthritis with a two-sample Mendelian Randomization analysis. It might be the first study to combine body mass index and body shape trait (WC, HC, and WHR) to assess the causal effects of obesity on osteoarthritis with the help of GWAS datasets. This study provided strong genetic evidence that BMI, WC, and HC, but not WHR, had positive causal effects on both knee and hip osteoarthritis.
Obesity has increased worldwide and caused plenty of problems with the development of society. At present, 39% of the population around the world is obese or overweight despite decades of efforts to control it [6]. Osteoarthritis is a global disease that causes great pain and dysfunction in the elderly, the incidence of which is rising annually. According to previous research, up to two-thirds of the elderly obese population was affected by OA [2]. Thus, it attracts plenty of researchers to explore the relationships between obesity and osteoarthritis. The body mass index is the most frequent index of general obesity, which is easily accessible and has clear categories [20]. Carlen Reyes et al. found that overweight and obesity could increase the risk of hand, hip, and knee OA with a dose–response gradient with increasing BMI through a cohort study in Spanish [8] and a 5% to 10% weight loss in the obese population could significantly improve osteoarthritis pain [21]. Another study also showed that weight loss might benefit osteoarthritis; it concluded that weight loss of 10–19.9% of baseline body weight had substantial clinical and mechanistic benefits compared with less weight loss, which would reduce pain and improve function. The results obtained by these above studies were consistent with our research.
In recent years, scholars have come to realize that abdominal obesity plays an important role in geriatric diseases. Nevertheless, the BMI could not distinguish between abdominal or peripheral fat despite its important role in assessing obesity [22]. On account of this, WHO promoted consultations and research related to abdominal obesity indices such as WC and WHR to compensate for the limitations of BMI [23]. This study studied the relationships concerning not only general obesity (BMI) but abdominal obesity (WC, HC, and WHR) with osteoarthritis, which provided a reference at which obesity measures could predict the risk of osteoarthritis. A cohort study conducted by Badley found that both BMI and WHR showed apparent associations between obesity and OA [24]. It was proved that being overweight earlier in adult life increased the risks of knee OA and hip OA based on the index of BMI, WC, HC, and WHR [25]. Christiansen et al. performed an observational study and indicated that higher WC increased the risk of incident low physical function in OA patients [26]. Similar research revealed elevated WC was associated with a slightly higher risk of disability over time in OA patients [27]. Additionally, a cross-sectional study indicated that either BMI or WHR was a strong predictor of osteoarthritis, but WHR could not increase the predictive ability of BMI when predicting osteoarthritis risk [28]. However, the observational and cohort studies above were limited due to the small amount of sample size and could not decrease bias, confounding factors, and so on. More importantly, these studies could only figure out the correlations but not causal relationships between obesity and osteoarthritis. Thus, we conducted MR analyses to assess the causal relationships with a large sample size based on GWAS in this study. The results revealed causal effects of BMI, WC, and HC but not WHR on OA, while no causal association between osteoarthritis on obesity provided genetic evidence about the causal relationships between different types of obesity and osteoarthritis.
According to previous studies, obesity could risk knee or hip osteoarthritis through mechanical factors for their load-bearing function. The main pathological features of OA patients with obesity are horizontal fracture of the osteochondral interface, cartilage erosion with chronic inflammation, and microvascular rupture [29]. Changes in load are related to the inflammatory state of articular cartilage and metabolic imbalance of biosynthesis, which ultimately leads to cartilage rupture [30]. It has shown that mechanical stress on extracellular matrix molecules or inflammatory cytokines would lead to the activation of hypertrophic chondrocytes [31], and both cartilage and subchondral bone are affected by mechanical stress. Additionally, some researchers also found that the BMI could interact with the misalignment of the knees to promote the progression of OA, and both the varus- and valgus-aligned knees had greater risks in the development of radiographic knee OA [32,33]. Obesity could also lead to bone marrow edema, which plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of knee osteoarthritis [34,35]. Based on these studies, there was no denying that mechanical stress played a crucial part in the occurrence of osteoarthritis. Apart from the mechanical factors, more and more evidence indicated that inflammation was also a crucial part between obesity and osteoarthritis [36]. According to the previous study, adipose tissues could produce pro-inflammatory cytokines (including TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1) and adipokine (including leptin and adiponectin) to regulate articular chondrocytes [37]. As the main adipokine secreted by adipose cells, leptin and its receptor are closely associated with the stage of OA [38]. A cross-sectional study found that the levels of leptin were significantly higher in the OA patients than in the control group [39]. Another analysis involving 6408 participants also indicated that leptin levels but not adiponectin were associated with OA and partially mediated the association between adiposity and osteoarthritis [40]. Moreover, Griffin et al. also revealed that leptin played an essential part in obesity-related OA, while the adiposity alone is not enough to cause knee OA [41]. All of these studies showed the great importance of leptin in the relationship between obesity and osteoarthritis, and further research is needed to clarify the potential mechanism.
This was the first research to explore the causal associations in genetics between general obesity as well as abdominal obesity and osteoarthritis with the MR analyses. The MR analysis could control the unmeasured confounders and reverse causality biases that existed in the observational studies. Additionally, the genetic variants (large sample size and robustly associated SNPs) were taken as IVs to imitate the design of RCTs, which gave our study sufficient power to detect causal effects between obesity and osteoarthritis with high precision. However, there were some limitations in this study. Firstly, this MR analysis is based on European ancestry; whether similar results would be obtained in other ancestries is unknown. Moreover, the data in the research came from public datasets, making it hard to conduct subgroup analysis in osteoarthritis (hand OA, lower lamb OA, and so on).

5. Conclusions

The Mendelian Randomization analysis provides strong evidence that obesity plays an important role in the occurrence of osteoarthritis. Both general obesity (BMI) and abdominal obesity (WC and HC) had positive causal effects on knee and hip osteoarthritis. The results could deepen our understanding of the inner relationship between obesity and OA at genetic levels and raise our awareness of losing weight within reasonable limits.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm12010320/s1, Table S1: The selected SNPs that are associated with body mass index and knee osteoarthritis. Table S2: The selected SNPs that are associated with body mass index and hip osteoarthritis. Table S3: The selected SNPs that are associated with waist circumference and knee osteoarthritis. Table S4: The selected SNPs that are associated with waist circumference and hip osteoarthritis. Table S5: The selected SNPs that are associated with hip circumference and knee osteoarthritis. Table S6: The selected SNPs that are associated with hip circumference and hip osteoarthritis. Table S7: The selected SNPs that are associated with waist-to-hip ratio and knee osteoarthritis. Table S8: The selected SNPs that are associated with waist-to-hip ratio and hip osteoarthritis. Figure S1: The MR results for causal effect regarding waist circumference on knee osteoarthritis. Figure S2: The MR results for causal effect regarding waist circumference on hip osteoarthritis. Figure S3: The MR results for causal effect regarding hip circumference on knee osteoarthritis. Figure S4: The MR results for causal effect regarding hip circumference on hip osteoarthritis.

Author Contributions

L.L.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Validation, Writing—Original Draft. Y.C.: Validation, Investigation. M.X.: Formal analysis, Validation. J.L.: Visualization, Software. G.Z.: Formal analysis, Software. Z.J.: Visualization. R.Z.: Software. X.D.: Supervision, Funding acquisition, Writing—Review and Editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was based on publicly available datasets, and additional ethics approval was not needed. The ethics approval has been obtained by the Ethics Committee of UK Biobank and other local ethics committees, and written informed consent was obtained from all subjects. All methods performed in this study were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed Consent Statement

All the individuals in the original studies consented to the publication of the data, and written consent forms were obtained from all participants.

Data Availability Statement

All the data used in this study are available at GWAS datasets (https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk (accessed on 7 November 2022)).

Acknowledgments

We thank the contributors of the original GWAS datasets.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Martel-Pelletier, J.; Barr, A.J.; Cicuttini, F.M.; Conaghan, P.G.; Cooper, C.; Goldring, M.B.; Goldring, S.R.; Jones, G.; Teichtahl, A.J.; Pelletier, J.P. Osteoarthritis. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 2016, 2, 16072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Dickson, B.M.; Roelofs, A.J.; Rochford, J.J.; Wilson, H.M.; De Bari, C. The burden of metabolic syndrome on osteoarthritic joints. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2019, 21, 289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Kulkarni, K.; Karssiens, T.; Kumar, V.; Pandit, H. Obesity and osteoarthritis. Maturitas 2016, 89, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Abramoff, B.; Caldera, F.E. Osteoarthritis: Pathology, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options. Med. Clin. N. Am. 2020, 104, 293–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Katz, J.N.; Arant, K.R.; Loeser, R.F. Diagnosis and Treatment of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Review. JAMA 2021, 325, 568–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Gonzalez-Muniesa, P.; Martinez-Gonzalez, M.A.; Hu, F.B.; Despres, J.P.; Matsuzawa, Y.; Loos, R.J.F.; Moreno, L.A.; Bray, G.A.; Martinez, J.A. Obesity. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 2017, 3, 17034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bluher, M. Obesity: Global epidemiology and pathogenesis. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 2019, 15, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Reyes, C.; Leyland, K.M.; Peat, G.; Cooper, C.; Arden, N.K.; Prieto-Alhambra, D. Association Between Overweight and Obesity and Risk of Clinically Diagnosed Knee, Hip, and Hand Osteoarthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016, 68, 1869–1875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Misra, D.; Fielding, R.A.; Felson, D.T.; Niu, J.; Brown, C.; Nevitt, M.; Lewis, C.E.; Torner, J.; Neogi, T.; Study, M. Risk of Knee Osteoarthritis With Obesity, Sarcopenic Obesity, and Sarcopenia. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019, 71, 232–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Jayedi, A.; Soltani, S.; Zargar, M.S.; Khan, T.A.; Shab-Bidar, S. Central fatness and risk of all cause mortality: Systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 72 prospective cohort studies. BMJ 2020, 370, m3324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yarmolinsky, J.; Wade, K.H.; Richmond, R.C.; Langdon, R.J.; Bull, C.J.; Tilling, K.M.; Relton, C.L.; Lewis, S.J.; Davey Smith, G.; Martin, R.M. Causal Inference in Cancer Epidemiology: What Is the Role of Mendelian Randomization? Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2018, 27, 995–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Burgess, S.; Small, D.S.; Thompson, S.G. A review of instrumental variable estimators for Mendelian randomization. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 2017, 26, 2333–2355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Lawlor, D.A.; Harbord, R.M.; Sterne, J.A.C.; Timpson, N.; Davey Smith, G. Mendelian randomization: Using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology. Stat. Med. 2008, 27, 1133–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Locke, A.E.; Kahali, B.; Berndt, S.I.; Justice, A.E.; Pers, T.H.; Day, F.R.; Powell, C.; Vedantam, S.; Buchkovich, M.L.; Yang, J.; et al. Genetic studies of body mass index yield new insights for obesity biology. Nature 2015, 518, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Shungin, D.; Winkler, T.W.; Croteau-Chonka, D.C.; Ferreira, T.; Locke, A.E.; Mägi, R.; Strawbridge, R.J.; Pers, T.H.; Fischer, K.; Justice, A.E.; et al. New genetic loci link adipose and insulin biology to body fat distribution. Nature 2015, 518, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Tachmazidou, I.; Hatzikotoulas, K.; Southam, L.; Esparza-Gordillo, J.; Haberland, V.; Zheng, J.; Johnson, T.; Koprulu, M.; Zengini, E.; Steinberg, J.; et al. Identification of new therapeutic targets for osteoarthritis through genome-wide analyses of UK Biobank data. Nat. Genet. 2019, 51, 230–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Hartwig, F.P.; Davies, N.M.; Hemani, G.; Davey Smith, G. Two-sample Mendelian randomization: Avoiding the downsides of a powerful, widely applicable but potentially fallible technique. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2016, 45, 1717–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Bowden, J.; Davey Smith, G.; Haycock, P.C.; Burgess, S. Consistent Estimation in Mendelian Randomization with Some Invalid Instruments Using a Weighted Median Estimator. Genet. Epidemiol. 2016, 40, 304–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Bowden, J.; Davey Smith, G.; Burgess, S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: Effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2015, 44, 512–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Nuttall, F.Q. Body Mass Index: Obesity, BMI, and Health: A Critical Review. Nutr. Today 2015, 50, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chu, I.; Lim, A.; Ng, C. Effects of meaningful weight loss beyond symptomatic relief in adults with knee osteoarthritis and obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. Off. J. Int. Assoc. Study Obes. 2018, 19, 1597–1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Mudie, K.; Lawlor, D.A.; Pearce, N.; Crampin, A.; Tomlinson, L.; Tafatatha, T.; Musicha, C.; Nitsch, D.; Smeeth, L.; Nyirenda, M.J. How does the association of general and central adiposity with glycaemia and blood pressure differ by gender and area of residence in a Malawian population: A cross-sectional study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2018, 47, 887–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Nishida, C.; Ko, G.T.; Kumanyika, S. Body fat distribution and noncommunicable diseases in populations: Overview of the 2008 WHO Expert Consultation on Waist Circumference and Waist-Hip Ratio. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 64, 2–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Badley, E.; Zahid, S.; Wilfong, J.; Perruccio, A. The relationship between body mass index and osteoarthritis for single and multi-site osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, or knee: Findings from the CLSA. Arthritis Care Res. 2021, 74, 1879–1887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Holliday, K.; McWilliams, D.; Maciewicz, R.; Muir, K.; Zhang, W.; Doherty, M. Lifetime body mass index, other anthropometric measures of obesity and risk of knee or hip osteoarthritis in the GOAL case-control study. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2011, 19, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Christiansen, M.B.; Thoma, L.M.; Master, H.; Voinier, D.; White, D.K. The Association of an Increasing Waist Circumference and Risk of Incident Low Physical Function in Adults with Knee Osteoarthritis. J. Rheumatol. 2020, 47, 1550–1556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Batsis, J.; Zbehlik, A.; Barre, L.; Mackenzie, T.; Bartels, S. The impact of waist circumference on function and physical activity in older adults: Longitudinal observational data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Nutr. J. 2014, 13, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Culvenor, A.G.; Felson, D.T.; Wirth, W.; Dannhauer, T.; Eckstein, F. Is local or central adiposity more strongly associated with incident knee osteoarthritis than the body mass index in men or women? Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2018, 26, 1033–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Chen, L.; Yao, F.; Wang, T.; Li, G.; Chen, P.; Bulsara, M.; Zheng, J.; Landao-Bassonga, E.; Firth, M.; Vasantharao, P.; et al. Horizontal fissuring at the osteochondral interface: A novel and unique pathological feature in patients with obesity-related osteoarthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2020, 79, 811–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Sun, A.R.; Udduttula, A.; Li, J.; Liu, Y.; Ren, P.G.; Zhang, P. Cartilage tissue engineering for obesity-induced osteoarthritis: Physiology, challenges, and future prospects. J. Orthop. Translat. 2021, 26, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Goldring, M.; Otero, M.; Plumb, D.; Dragomir, C.; Favero, M.; El Hachem, K.; Hashimoto, K.; Roach, H.; Olivotto, E.; Borzì, R.; et al. Roles of inflammatory and anabolic cytokines in cartilage metabolism: Signals and multiple effectors converge upon MMP-13 regulation in osteoarthritis. Eur. Cells Mater. 2011, 21, 202–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Yusuf, E.; Bijsterbosch, J.; Slagboom, P.E.; Rosendaal, F.R.; Huizinga, T.W.J.; Kloppenburg, M. Body mass index and alignment and their interaction as risk factors for progression of knees with radiographic signs of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2011, 19, 1117–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Runhaar, J.; van Middelkoop, M.; Reijman, M.; Vroegindeweij, D.; Oei, E.H.G.; Bierma-Zeinstra, S.M.A. Malalignment: A possible target for prevention of incident knee osteoarthritis in overweight and obese women. Rheumatology 2014, 53, 1618–1624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Lim, Y.Z.; Wang, Y.; Wluka, A.E.; Davies-Tuck, M.L.; Hanna, F.; Urquhart, D.M.; Cicuttini, F.M. Association of obesity and systemic factors with bone marrow lesions at the knee: A systematic review. Semin. Arthritis Rheum. 2014, 43, 600–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Hu, Y.; Chen, X.; Wang, S.; Jing, Y.; Su, J. Subchondral bone microenvironment in osteoarthritis and pain. Bone Res. 2021, 9, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Oliveira, M.C.; Vullings, J.; van de Loo, F.A.J. Osteoporosis and osteoarthritis are two sides of the same coin paid for obesity. Nutrition 2020, 70, 110486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Fang, H.; Judd, R. Adiponectin Regulation and Function. Compr. Physiol. 2018, 8, 1031–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Ait Eldjoudi, D.; Cordero Barreal, A.; Gonzalez-Rodríguez, M.; Ruiz-Fernández, C.; Farrag, Y.; Farrag, M.; Lago, F.; Capuozzo, M.; Gonzalez-Gay, M.A.; Mera Varela, A.; et al. Leptin in Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis: Player or Bystander? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 2859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Massengale, M.; Reichmann, W.M.; Losina, E.; Solomon, D.H.; Katz, J.N. The relationship between hand osteoarthritis and serum leptin concentration in participants of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2012, 14, R132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Kroon, F.P.B.; Veenbrink, A.I.; de Mutsert, R.; Visser, A.W.; van Dijk, K.W.; le Cessie, S.; Rosendaal, F.R.; Kloppenburg, M. The role of leptin and adiponectin as mediators in the relationship between adiposity and hand and knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2019, 27, 1761–1767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Jiang, M.; He, J.; Sun, Y.; Dong, X.; Yao, J.; Gu, H.; Liu, L. Leptin Induced TLR4 Expression via the JAK2-STAT3 Pathway in Obesity-Related Osteoarthritis. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2021, 2021, 7385160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jcm 12 00320 g001 550
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of Mendelian Randomization (MR). Three assumptions should be met: Assumption 1: The SNPs should be closely related to exposures; Assumption 2: The SNPs selected should be independent of confounders; Assumption 3: The SNPs should affect results only through exposure but not the direct correlation. (SNPs: single nucleotide polymorphisms).
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of Mendelian Randomization (MR). Three assumptions should be met: Assumption 1: The SNPs should be closely related to exposures; Assumption 2: The SNPs selected should be independent of confounders; Assumption 3: The SNPs should affect results only through exposure but not the direct correlation. (SNPs: single nucleotide polymorphisms).
Jcm 12 00320 g001
Jcm 12 00320 g002 550
Figure 2. The MR results of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (A) Scatter plot about the causal effect of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (B) Forest plot for the overall causal effects of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (C) Leave-one-out analysis for the causal effect of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (D) Funnel plot of SNPs related to body mass index and knee osteoarthritis.
Figure 2. The MR results of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (A) Scatter plot about the causal effect of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (B) Forest plot for the overall causal effects of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (C) Leave-one-out analysis for the causal effect of body mass index on knee osteoarthritis. (D) Funnel plot of SNPs related to body mass index and knee osteoarthritis.
Jcm 12 00320 g002
Jcm 12 00320 g003 550
Figure 3. The MR results of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (A) Scatter plot about the causal effect of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (B) Forest plot for the overall causal effects of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (C) Leave-one-out analysis for the causal effect of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (D) Funnel plot of SNPs related to body mass index and hip osteoarthritis.
Figure 3. The MR results of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (A) Scatter plot about the causal effect of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (B) Forest plot for the overall causal effects of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (C) Leave-one-out analysis for the causal effect of body mass index on hip osteoarthritis. (D) Funnel plot of SNPs related to body mass index and hip osteoarthritis.
Jcm 12 00320 g003
Jcm 12 00320 g004 550
Figure 4. The forest plot about the causal effects of WC and HC on osteoarthritis. (A) Forest plot of the casual effect of WC on KOA. (B) Forest plot of the casual effect of WC on HOA. (C) Forest plot of the casual effect of HC on KOA. (D) Forest plot of the casual effect about HC on HOA. (WC: waist circumference; HC: hip circumference; KOA: knee osteoarthritis; HOA: hip osteoarthritis; OR: odds ratio).
Figure 4. The forest plot about the causal effects of WC and HC on osteoarthritis. (A) Forest plot of the casual effect of WC on KOA. (B) Forest plot of the casual effect of WC on HOA. (C) Forest plot of the casual effect of HC on KOA. (D) Forest plot of the casual effect about HC on HOA. (WC: waist circumference; HC: hip circumference; KOA: knee osteoarthritis; HOA: hip osteoarthritis; OR: odds ratio).
Jcm 12 00320 g004
Table
Table 1. The Mendelian randomization analysis results with regard to causal effect of BMI, WC, HC, and WHR on Knee osteoarthritis.
Table 1. The Mendelian randomization analysis results with regard to causal effect of BMI, WC, HC, and WHR on Knee osteoarthritis.
ExposureMethodsSNP (n)OROR 95% CIp-Value
BMIMR Egger771.2800.884, 1.8540.195
Weighted median771.6151.403, 1.8602.57 × 10−11
Inverse variance weighted771.6941.492, 1.9233.96 × 10−16
Simple mode771.6841.251, 2.2679.51 × 10−4
Weighted mode771.6001.323, 1.9376.81 × 10−6
WCMR Egger421.4130.825, 2.4200.215
Weighted median421.5761.315, 1.8898.65 × 10−7
Inverse variance weighted421.8271.564, 2.1342.68 × 10−14
Simple mode421.5551.132, 2.1360.009
Weighted mode421.6101.247, 2.0797.22 × 10−4
HCMR Egger511.6990.910, 3.1750.103
Weighted median511.6161.371, 1.9039.78 × 10−9
Inverse variance weighted511.6101.357, 1.9125.03 × 10−8
Simple mode511.6731.231, 2.2730.002
Weighted mode511.6731.283, 2.1813.96 × 10−4
WHRMR Egger201.0730.287, 4.0090.918
Weighted median201.0880.878, 1.3500.440
Inverse variance weighted201.1210.917, 1.3710.264
Simple mode201.0850.663, 1.7760.749
Weighted mode201.0610.680, 1.6540.797
BMI: body mass index; WC: waist circumference; HC: hip circumference; WHR: waist-to-hip ratio; SNP: single nucleotide polymorphism; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.
Table
Table 2. The Mendelian randomization analysis results with regard to causal effect of BMI, WC, HC, and WHR on Hip osteoarthritis.
Table 2. The Mendelian randomization analysis results with regard to causal effect of BMI, WC, HC, and WHR on Hip osteoarthritis.
ExposureMethodsSNP (n)OROR 95% CIp-Value
BMIMR Egger771.8641.144, 3.0350.014
Weighted median771.4771.225, 1.7824.54 × 10−5
Inverse variance weighted771.4121.196, 1.6664.58 × 10−5
Simple mode771.3960.858, 2.2700.183
Weighted mode771.6251.157, 2.2810.006
WCMR Egger422.3431.301, 4.2210.007
Weighted median421.5141.205, 1.9023.7 × 10−4
Inverse variance weighted421.4911.254, 1.7725.85 × 10−6
Simple mode421.3920.818, 2.3690.230
Weighted mode421.6060.987, 2.6150.064
HCMR Egger511.6290.854, 3.1110.145
Weighted median511.4281.164, 1.7526.29 × 10−4
Inverse variance weighted511.4391.205, 1.7195.82 × 10−5
Simple mode511.6570.936, 2.9330.089
Weighted mode511.6751.007, 2.7860.053
WHRMR Egger200.5980.132, 2.7040.513
Weighted median201.1280.869, 1.4650.364
Inverse variance weighted201.2160.961, 1.5390.103
Simple mode201.4450.849, 2.4600.191
Weighted mode201.0250.630, 1.6670.922
BMI: body mass index; WC: waist circumference; HC: hip circumference; WHR: waist-to-hip ratio; SNP: single nucleotide polymorphism; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lyu, L.; Cai, Y.; Xiao, M.; Liang, J.; Zhang, G.; Jing, Z.; Zhang, R.; Dang, X. Causal Relationships of General and Abdominal Adiposity on Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010320

AMA Style

Lyu L, Cai Y, Xiao M, Liang J, Zhang G, Jing Z, Zhang R, Dang X. Causal Relationships of General and Abdominal Adiposity on Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023; 12(1):320. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010320

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lyu, Leifeng, Yuanqing Cai, Mofan Xiao, Jialin Liang, Guangyang Zhang, Zhaopu Jing, Rupeng Zhang, and Xiaoqian Dang. 2023. "Causal Relationships of General and Abdominal Adiposity on Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study" Journal of Clinical Medicine 12, no. 1: 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010320

APA Style

Lyu, L., Cai, Y., Xiao, M., Liang, J., Zhang, G., Jing, Z., Zhang, R., & Dang, X. (2023). Causal Relationships of General and Abdominal Adiposity on Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(1), 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010320

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop