Red and processed meat intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study
Hu B, He X, Sun H, Hu Y, Li F, Sun Y, Sun J, Feng L
Clinical nutrition ESPEN · 11 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2024-02-19 · Clin Nutr ESPEN · vol. 60 · pp. 289–297
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Cited
- 16 citations · more than 97% of similar papers · 6.1× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 52 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Meat and Animal Product Quality · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Keywords
- Mendelian randomization, Medicine, Randomization, Mendelian inheritance, Disease, Red meat, Internal medicine, Randomized controlled trial, Genetics, Pathology, Gene, Biology
- MeSH
- animals, cattle, humans, cardiovascular diseases, reproducibility of results, meat, coronary artery disease, heart failure, stroke, genome-wide association study, mendelian randomization analysis
8 authors
From CN
- Bing HuZhongshan People's Hospital
- Xin HeZhongshan People's Hospital
- Hao SunZhongshan People's Hospital
- Yongyi HuZhongshan People's Hospital
- Fei LiZhongshan People's Hospital
- Yanxiang SunZhongshan People's Hospital
Abstract
Background & aims
Previous observational studies have yielded inconsistent findings regarding associations between red/processed meat intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Some studies have suggested positive relationships, while others have demonstrated no significant associations. However, causal effects remain uncertain. This 2023 Mendelianrandomization (MR) study investigated the causal relationship between red and processed meat (porkmeat, mutton meat, beef meat)intake and CVD risk by analyzing summary data from the UK Biobank (exposure), CARDIoGRAMplusC4D (coronary artery disease [CAD]), MEGASTROKE (stroke), Nielsen et al. (atrial fibrillation [AF]), HERMES (heart failure [HF]), and FinnGen (cardiovascular outcomes) public databases.
Methods
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of red meat (pork, beef, and mutton) and processed meat were sourced from the United Kingdom (UK) Biobank. GWAS data on CVD for this study were obtained from the Gene and FinnGen consortia. The primary method employed for the two-sample MR analysis was inverse variance weighting (IVW). Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the reliability and consistency of the results.
Results
Genetically predicted red and processed meat consumption did not demonstrate a causal association with any CVD outcomes when employing the IVW method. For processed meat intake, the odds ratios (ORs) (95% confidence intervals CIs) in large consortia were as follows: 0.88 (0.56-1.39) for CAD, 0.91 (0.65-1.27) for AF, 0.84 (0.58-1.21) for HF, and 1.00 (0.75-1.05) for stroke. In FinnGen, the ORs were as follows: 1.15 (0.83-1.59) for CAD, 1.25 (0.75-2.07) for AF, 1.09 (0.73-1.64) for HF, and 1.27 (0.85-1.91) for stroke. For beef intake, the ORs (95% CIs) in large consortia were as follows: 0.70 (0.28-1.73) for CAD, 0.85 (0.49-1.49) for AF, 0.80 (0.35-1.83) for HF, and 1.29 (0.85-1.95) for stroke. In FinnGen, the ORs were as follows: 2.01 (0.75-5.39) for CAD, 1.83 (0.60-5.56) for AF, 0.80 (0.30-2.13) for HF, and 1.30 (0.62-2.73) for stroke. For pork intake, the ORs (95% CIs) in large consortia were as follows: 1.25 (0.37-4.22) for CAD, 1.26 (0.73-2.15) for AF, 1.71 (0.86-3.39) for HF, and 1.15 (0.63-2.11) for stroke. In FinnGen, the ORs were as follows: 1.12 (0.43-2.88) for CAD, 0.39 (0.08-1.83) for AF, 0.62 (0.20-1.88) for HF, and 0.60 (0.21-1.65) for stroke. For mutton intake, the ORs (95% CIs) in large consortia were as follows: 0.84 (0.48-1.44) for CAD, 0.84 (0.56-1.26) for AF, 1.04 (0.65-1.67) for HF, and 1.06 (0.77-1.45) for stroke. In FinnGen, the ORs were as follows: 1.20 (0.65-2.21) for CAD, 0.92 (0.44-1.92) for AF, 0.74 (0.34-1.58) for HF, and 0.75 (0.45-1.24) for stroke. The results remained robust and consistent in both the meta-analysis and supplementary MR analysis.
Conclusions
This MR study demonstrated no significant causal relationships between red/processed meat intake and the risk of the four CVD outcomes examined. Further investigation is warranted to confirm these findings.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY-NC-ND).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.