Is there a causal role for homocysteine concentration in blood pressure? A Mendelian randomization study. Issue 1 (16th December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Borges, Maria C; Hartwig, Fernando P; Oliveira, Isabel O; Horta, Bernardo L
• Is Part Of: American journal of clinical nutrition. Volume 103:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 39
• Page End: 49
• Publication Date: 2015-12-16
• Subjects: blood pressure -- cohort studies -- homocysteine -- Mendelian randomization -- molecular epidemiology; Diet therapy -- Periodicals; Nutrition -- Periodicals; Dietetics -- Periodicals; 613.205
• DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.115.116038
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-9165

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Background: An understanding of whether homocysteine is a cause or a marker of increased blood pressure is relevant because blood homocysteine can be effectively lowered by safe and inexpensive interventions (e.g., vitamin B-6, B-9, and B-12 supplementation). Objective: The aim was to assess the causal influence of homocysteine on systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively) in adults with the use of Mendelian randomization (MR). Design: Data from the 1982 Pelotas Birth Cohort (Brazil) were used. A total of 4297 subjects were evaluated in 2004–2005 (mean age: 22.8 y). The association of homocysteine concentration with SBP and DBP was assessed by conventional ordinary least-squares (OLS) linear regression and 2-stage least-squares (2SLS) regression (MR analysis). The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase ( MTHFR ) C677T (rs1801133) was used as proxy for homocysteine concentration. We also applied MR to data from the International Consortium for Blood Pressure (ICBP) genomewide association studies (>69, 000 participants) using rs1801133 and additional homocysteine-associated SNPs as instruments. Results: In OLS regression, a 1-SD unit increase in log homocysteine concentration was associated with an increase of 0.9 (95% CI: 0.4, 1.4) mm Hg in SBP and of 1.0 (95% CI: 0.6, 1.4) mm Hg in DBP. In 2SLS regression, for the same increase in homocysteine, the coefficients were −1.8 mm Hg for SBP (95% CI: −3.9, 0.4 mm Hg; P = 0.01) and 0.1 mm Hg for DBP (95% CI: −1.5, 1.7 mm Hg; P = 0.24). In the MR analysis of ICBP data, homocysteine concentration was not associated with SBP (β = 0.6 mm Hg for each 1-SD unit increase in log homocysteine; 95% CI: −0.8, 1.9 mm Hg) but was positively associated with DBP (β = 1.1 mm Hg; 95% CI: 0.2, 1.9 mm Hg). The association of genetically increased homocysteine with DBP was not consistent across different SNPs. Conclusion: Overall, the present findings do not corroborate the hypothesis that homocysteine has a causal role in blood pressure, especially in SBP.