Back

Association between viral infections and Meniere's disease risk: a two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomization study and meta-analysis

Li, X.; Yu, Y.; Li, X.; Jiang, F.; Zhang, T.; Lu, J.; Li, N.; Li, H.; Zhang, D.; Wang, H.

2025-09-12 otolaryngology
10.1101/2025.09.09.25335399 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionMenieres disease (MD) is a chronic inner ear disorder that can lead to hearing and balance disabilities, yet its etiology remains unknown. We employed Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the causal relationship between viral infections and MD. MethodsWe employed bidirectional two-sample MR analysis to investigate the causal relationship between 13 viral infections and MD. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected as instrumental variables for MR analysis from large European population-based genome-wide association studies (GWAS) corresponding to the 13 viral infections and Menieres disease. The inverse variance-weighted (IVW) method was used as the primary MR analysis approach, with sensitivity analyses conducted to assess pleiotropy and heterogeneity. Additionally, for viral infections with multiple GWAS data sources, MR analysis was performed separately for each dataset, and the results were combined using a random-effects model for meta-analysis. ResultsAfter Bonferroni correction and sensitivity analyses, MR and meta-analysis results indicated a negative causal association between genetically predicted HSV infection and Menieres disease (OR=0.90, CI=0.85, 0.96), as well as a negative causal effect of genetically predicted HPV virus on Menieres disease (OR=0.82, CI=0.75, 0.90). There was no evidence of a causal relationship from Menieres disease to viral infections. ConclusionsOur research findings offer compelling evidence that genetically predicted HPV and HSV infections are associated with a reduced risk of MD. These discoveries contribute to an enhanced understanding of the etiology of MD and the development of future interventions to mitigate the risk of MD.

Matching journals

The top 10 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.