Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 13;15(1):9832.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53623-5.

Effect of genetically predicted sclerostin on cardiovascular biomarkers, risk factors, and disease outcomes

Affiliations

Effect of genetically predicted sclerostin on cardiovascular biomarkers, risk factors, and disease outcomes

Marta Alcalde-Herraiz et al. Nat Commun. .

Abstract

Sclerostin inhibitors protect against osteoporotic fractures, but their cardiovascular safety remains unclear. We conducted a cis-Mendelian randomisation analysis to estimate the causal effect of sclerostin levels on cardiovascular risk factors. We meta-analysed three GWAS of sclerostin levels including 49,568 Europeans and selected 2 SNPs to be used as instruments. We included heel bone mineral density and hip fracture risk as positive control outcomes. Public GWAS and UK Biobank patient-level data were used for the study outcomes, which include cardiovascular events, risk factors, and biomarkers. Lower sclerostin levels were associated with higher bone mineral density and 85% reduction in hip fracture risk. However, genetically predicted lower sclerostin levels led to 25-85% excess coronary artery disease risk, 40% to 60% increased risk of type 2 diabetes, and worse cardiovascular biomarkers values, including higher triglycerides, and decreased HDL cholesterol levels. Results also suggest a potential (but borderline) association with increased risk of myocardial infarction. Our study provides genetic evidence of a causal relationship between reduced levels of sclerostin and improved bone health and fracture protection, but increased risk of cardiovascular events and risk factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests DPA’s department has received grant/s from Amgen, Chiesi-Taylor, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB Biopharma. His research group has received consultancy fees from Astra Zeneca and UCB Biopharma. Amgen, Astellas, Janssen, Synapse Management Partners and UCB Biopharma have funded or supported training programmes organised by DPA’s department. The views expressed in this study are the personal views of MGM and do not represent the views of her current employer, the European Medicines Agency. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest. Ethics approval & consent to participate All participants provided informed consent to participate in each one of the GWAS we have used. UK Biobank received ethical approval from the North West Multi-centre Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 16/NW/0274). All participants provided informed consent to participate.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Forest plot of MR estimates.
Effect sizes were calculated using the generalised inverse variance weighted method. Blue represents the results based on published GWAS summary statistics as the outcome; maroon the results obtained using a linear regression (for continuous outcomes) and logistic regression (for categorical outcomes) on the UK Biobank outcomes; and orange indicates the results using cox regression for UK Biobank survival outcomes. Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval. A The horizontal axis shows the SD change per 1 SD decrease in sclerostin levels. GWAS results for LDL and HDL-Cholesterol are in mg/dL, mmol/L for GWAS results of fasting glucose, % change for HbA1c and SD increase for the other outcomes. B The horizontal axis shows the odds/hazard ratio per 1 SD decrease in sclerostin levels. Source data are provided as a Source Data file. Note: UKB-LR = UK Biobank logistic regression, UKB-SA = UK Biobank survival analysis. Details about sample sizes used to calculate the MR estimates can be found in Supplementary Table 5, Supplementary Table 7, and Supplementary Table 8.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schema of the study design.

References

    1. Salari N., et al. Global prevalence of osteoporosis among the world older adults: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Orthop. Surg. Res.16, 10.1186/s13018-021-02821-8 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shen, Y. et al. The Global Burden of Osteoporosis, Low Bone Mass, and Its Related Fracture in 204 Countries and Territories, 1990-2019. Front. Endocrinol. (Lausanne)13, 882241 (2022). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xiao, P. L. et al. Global, regional prevalence, and risk factors of osteoporosis according to the World Health Organization diagnostic criteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos. Int.33, 2137–2153 (2022). - PubMed
    1. Deutschbein, J. et al. Health-related quality of life and associated factors after hip fracture. Results from a six-month prospective cohort study. PeerJ11, e14671 (2023). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Braithwaite, R. S., Col, N. F. & Wong, J. B. Estimating hip fracture morbidity, mortality and costs. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc.51, 364–370 (2003). - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources