Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34922334›Full record

SynthesisClinical chemistry2022

Obesity and Kidney Function: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.

Alisa D Kjaergaard, Alexander Teumer, Daniel R Witte, Kira-Julia Stanzick, Thomas W Winkler, Stephen Burgess, Christina Ellervik

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical chemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Alisa D KjaergaardSteno Diabetes Center Aarhus, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3899-1324
Alexander TeumerInstitute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8309-094X
Daniel R WitteSteno Diabetes Center Aarhus, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Kira-Julia StanzickDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Thomas W WinklerDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Stephen BurgessMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5365-8760
Christina EllervikDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Steno Diabetes Centers · DKUniversity of Regensburg · DEUniversitätsmedizin Greifswald · DEUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

British Heart Foundation CH/12/2/29428British Heart Foundation RG/13/13/30194British Heart Foundation RG/18/13/33946Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/7Wellcome Trust 204623Wellcome Trust 204623/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D) are correlated risk factors for chronic kidney disease (CKD).

methodsUsing summary data from GIANT (Genetic Investigation of Anthropometric Traits), DIAGRAM (DIAbetes Genetics Replication And Meta-analysis), and CKDGen (CKD Genetics), we examined causality and directionality of the association between obesity and kidney function. Bidirectional 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) estimated the total causal effects of body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) on kidney function, and vice versa. Effects of adverse obesity and T2D were examined by stratifying BMI variants by their association with WHR and T2D. Multivariable MR estimated the direct causal effects of BMI and WHR on kidney function. The inverse variance weighted random-effects MR for Europeans was the main analysis, accompanied by several sensitivity MR analyses.

resultsOne standard deviation (SD ≈ 4.8 kg/m2) genetically higher BMI was associated with decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) [β=-0.032 (95% confidence intervals: -0.036, -0.027) log[eGFR], P = 1 × 10-43], increased blood urea nitrogen (BUN) [β = 0.010 (0.005, 0.015) log[BUN], P = 3 × 10-6], increased urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio [β = 0.199 (0.067, 0.332) log[urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR)], P = 0.003] in individuals with diabetes, and increased risk of microalbuminuria [odds ratios (OR) = 1.15 [1.04-1.28], P = 0.009] and CKD [1.13 (1.07-1.19), P = 3 × 10-6]. Corresponding estimates for WHR and for trans-ethnic populations were overall similar. The associations were driven by adverse obesity, and for microalbuminuria additionally by T2D. While genetically high BMI, unlike WHR, was directly associated with eGFR, BUN, and CKD, the pathway to albuminuria was likely through T2D. Genetically predicted kidney function was not associated with BMI or WHR.

conclusionsGenetically high BMI is associated with impaired kidney function, driven by adverse obesity, and for albuminuria additionally by T2D.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Renal Insufficiency, ChronicAlbuminsAlbuminuriaBody Mass IndexCreatinineGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansKidneyMendelian Randomization AnalysisObesityAlbuminsCreatininealbuminuriablood urea nitrogenbody mass indexchronicdiabetes mellitusglomerular filtration ratekidney function testsmendelian randomization analysisobesityrenal insufficiencytype 2waist-hip ratio

Identifiers

PMID34922334
PMCPMC7614591
OpenAlexW4205484184

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.