Back

Exploring Causal Association between Neuroticism Subclusters and Risk of Coronary Atherosclerosis: A Mendelian Randomization Analysis based on Genome-Wide Association Studies

Ming, J.; Li, R.-l.; Gao, Y.-l.; Huang, S.-t.; Yao, X.-y.; Tan, Q.; Zong, M.; Fan, L.-y.

2025-02-21 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2025.02.19.25322578 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundUnderstanding the risk factors associated with coronary atherosclerosis (CA)--an evident cardiovascular disease--is vital. This study aimed to explore the causal relationship between neuroticism subclusters and CA, focusing on lipids as mediators, using genome-wide association studies and Mendelian randomization (MR). Methods and ResultsInstrumental variables were selected based on their genetic associations with neuroticism subclusters and CA. Causal effects were primarily assessed using inverse variance-weighted (IVW) methods. Sensitivity analyses and colocalization analyses were conducted, and possible confounders were determined using multivariable MR analysis. IVW modeling revealed that neuroticism subclusters significantly affect CA risk (ebi-a-GCST006475 odds ratio [OR]: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.01-1.03, P = 1.52E-05; ebi-a-GCST006478 OR: 1.01, 95%CI: 1.00-1.02, P = 0.026; ebi-a-GCST006950 OR: 1.01, 95%CI: 1.00-1.02, P = 0.036). Cochrans Q test demonstrated moderate heterogeneity (ebi-a-GCST006475, P < 0.05, I{superscript 2} = 28%). The Steiger test confirmed the correct causal direction (P < 0.05). Multivariable MR remained significant after adjusting for confounders (P < 0.05). Mediation analyses suggested that lipids partially mediated the neuroticism-CA effect. ConclusionsOverall, our findings indicated a causal link between neuroticism subclusters and CA, with lipids partially mediating this relationship, emphasizing the role of psychosocial factors in cardiovascular risk assessment and intervention strategies.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.