Causal Association Between Tea Consumption and Gout: A Mendelian Randomization Study
Qi Wang, Yi-ning Liu, Hui Zhang, Ze-qun Zhang, Xiu-ying Huang, Wen-ze Xiao
Current Medical Science ›› 2023, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5) : 947-954.
Causal Association Between Tea Consumption and Gout: A Mendelian Randomization Study
Evidence from prospective studies on the consumption of tea and risk of gout is conflicting and limited. We aimed to investigate the potential causal effects of tea intake on gout using Mendelian randomization (MR).
Genome-wide association studies in UK Biobank included 349 376 individuals and successfully discovered single-nucleotide polymorphisms linked to consumption of one cup of tea per day. Summary statistics from the Chronic Kidney Disease Genetics consortium included 13 179 cases and 750 634 controls for gout. Two-sample MR analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between tea consumption and gout risk. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was used for primary analysis, and sensitivity analyses were also conducted to validate the potential causal effect.
In this study, the genetically predicted increase in tea consumption per cup was associated with a lower risk of gout in the IVW method (OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.82–0.98). Similar results were found in weighted median methods (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78–1.00), while no significant associations were found in MR-Egger (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.71–1.11), weighted mode (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.65–0.99), and simple mode (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75–1.36). In addition, no evidence of pleiotropy was detected by MR-Egger regression (P=0.95) or MR-PRESSO analysis (P=0.07).
This study provides evidence for the daily consumption of an extra cup of tea to reduce the risk of gout.
tea consumption / gout / single-nucleotide polymorphisms / Mendelian randomization
[1] |
DALYs GBD, Collaborators H.. Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 359 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet, 2018, 392(10159): 1859-1922
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] |
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
1000 Genomes Project Consortium
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
|
[41] |
|
[42] |
|
[43] |
|
[44] |
|
[45] |
|
[46] |
|
[47] |
|
[48] |
|
[49] |
|
[50] |
|
[51] |
|
/
〈 |
|
〉 |