双向孟德尔随机化研究以探索精神分裂症与发作性睡病之间的因果关系。

Bidirectional Mendelian randomization to explore the causal relationships between schizophrenia and narcolepsy.

作者信息

Geng Chaofan, Chen Chen

机构信息

Department of Neurology & Innovation Center for Neurological Disorders, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Neurological Disorders, Beijing, China.

Department of Neurology, Zhengzhou University People's Hospital, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.

出版信息

Schizophr Res. 2024 Dec;274:345-351. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2024.10.007. Epub 2024 Oct 25.

DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2024.10.007

PMID:39461090

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study employs the Mendelian Randomization (MR) approach to explore the potential causal relationship between schizophrenia and the risk of developing narcolepsy.

METHODS

Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) data from European populations were used to identify independent genetic variants associated with schizophrenia and narcolepsy, which were then used as instrumental variables in the analysis. The inverse variance weighting (IVW) method was performed to validate the findings. Effect sizes were presented as odds ratios (OR) and beta coefficients (β).

RESULTS

The IVW analysis showed no significant causal relationship between schizophrenia and narcolepsy (OR: 1.002, 95 % CI: 0.996-1.007, P = 0.531). Likewise, the reverse analysis did not find any significant causal association (OR: 1.059, 95 % CI: 0.717-1.567, P = 0.421). Sensitivity analyses further confirmed the robustness of these findings.

CONCLUSION

The MR analysis does not provide evidence for a bidirectional causal relationship between schizophrenia and narcolepsy. Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms and to identify potential targets for intervention.

摘要

引言

本研究采用孟德尔随机化（MR）方法，探讨精神分裂症与发作性睡病发病风险之间的潜在因果关系。

方法

利用来自欧洲人群的全基因组关联研究（GWAS）数据，确定与精神分裂症和发作性睡病相关的独立遗传变异，然后将其用作分析中的工具变量。采用逆方差加权（IVW）方法验证研究结果。效应量以优势比（OR）和β系数（β）表示。

结果

IVW分析显示，精神分裂症与发作性睡病之间无显著因果关系（OR：1.002，95%置信区间：0.996 - 1.007，P = 0.531）。同样，反向分析未发现任何显著的因果关联（OR：1.059，95%置信区间：0.717 - 1.567，P = 0.421）。敏感性分析进一步证实了这些结果的稳健性。