Back

Using human genetics to understand the effect of modulating targets of antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy

Borges, M. C.; Urquijo, H.; Yang, Q.; van der Graaf, A.; McBride, N.; Haug, E. B.; Soares, A. G.; Clayton, G. C.; Bond, T. A.; Al Arab, M.; Horn, J.; Thomas, L.; Bhatta, L.; Asvold, B. O.; Magnus, M. C.; Evans, D. M.; Burden, C.; Birchenall, K.; Brumpton, B.; Gaunt, T. R.; Hart, E. C.; Kutalik, Z.; Lawlor, D. A.

2026-05-20 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.05.12.26352361 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background and Aims Hypertension during pregnancy is a major cause of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality, yet the efficacy and safety of antihypertensive treatments in this setting remain uncertain. We evaluated the effects of antihypertensive drug targets on adverse pregnancy-related outcomes using genetic variants to instrument target perturbation. Methods We performed drug target Mendelian randomization to mimic pharmacological perturbation of targets from six commonly used antihypertensive drug classes, using data from up to 671,922 pregnant women. Genetic variants near drug target genes associated with systolic or diastolic blood pressure were selected as instruments. We estimated effects of target modulation on six primary and eight secondary pregnancy outcomes. Results Genetically instrumented downregulation of blood pressure through beta-blocker (BB) and calcium-channel blocker (CCB) targets, particularly ADRB1 and CACNB2, was associated with a reduced risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including preeclampsia. For example, CACNB2-instrumented lowering corresponded to a 7% (95% CI: 5-9%) reduction in preeclampsia risk per 1 mmHg decrease in blood pressure. For most other targets, estimates were directionally consistent but imprecise. Across additional outcomes, effects varied by target, with suggestive evidence for reduced risks of miscarriage, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and labour induction, although these estimates were accompanied by substantial uncertainty. Conclusions These findings support a protective effect of BB and CCB targets on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and highlight potential target-specific differences in safety. This work illustrates the value of Mendelian randomization in addressing clinical uncertainties where robust trial evidence is limited.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.8%
2
Hypertension
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.4%
3
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.8%
4
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.3%
5
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.9%
6
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
7
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.6%
11
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
12
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.8%
13
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
14
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
15
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
17
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
18
Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology
65 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
19
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
20
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
21
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
22
Atherosclerosis
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
24
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
Diabetologia
36 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
26
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.6%
27
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%