Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Glioma | Research

Association between psychiatric disorders and glioma risk: evidence from Mendelian randomization analysis

Authors: Wenzhuo Yang, Yu Han, Changjia He, Sheng Zhong, Fei Ren, Zhongping Chen, Yonggao Mou, Ke Sai

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Observational studies have explored the association of psychiatric disorders and the risk of brain cancers. However, the causal effect of specific mental illness on glioma remains elusive due to the lack of solid evidence.

Methods

We performed a two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to explore the causal relationships between 5 common psychiatric disorders (schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, autism spectrum disorder, and panic disorder) and glioma. Summary statistics for psychiatric disorders and glioma were extracted from Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) and 8 genome-wide association study (GWAS) datasets respectively. We calculated the MR estimates for odds ratio of glioma associated with each psychiatric disorder by using inverse-variance weighting (IVW) method. Sensitivity analyses such as weighted median estimator, MR-Egger and MR-PRESSO were leveraged to assess the strength of causal inference.

Results

A total of 30,657 participants of European ancestry were included in this study. After correction for multiple testing, we found that genetically predicted schizophrenia was associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of non-glioblastoma multiforme (non-GBM) (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.03–1.23, P = 0.0096). There is little evidence for the causal relationships between the other 4 psychiatric disorders with the risk of glioma.

Conclusions

In this MR analysis, we revealed an increased risk of non-GBM glioma in individuals with schizophrenia, which gives an insight into the etiology of glioma.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ostrom QT, et al. CBTRUS Statistical Report: primary brain and other Central Nervous System tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2014–2018. Neuro Oncol. 2021;23(12 Suppl 2):iii1–iii105.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ostrom QT, et al. CBTRUS Statistical Report: primary brain and other Central Nervous System tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2014–2018. Neuro Oncol. 2021;23(12 Suppl 2):iii1–iii105.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Stupp R, et al. Effect of Tumor-Treating Fields Plus maintenance temozolomide vs maintenance temozolomide alone on survival in patients with glioblastoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318(23):2306–16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stupp R, et al. Effect of Tumor-Treating Fields Plus maintenance temozolomide vs maintenance temozolomide alone on survival in patients with glioblastoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318(23):2306–16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Grinshpoon A, et al. Cancer in schizophrenia: is the risk higher or lower? Schizophr Res. 2005;73(2–3):333–41.CrossRefPubMed Grinshpoon A, et al. Cancer in schizophrenia: is the risk higher or lower? Schizophr Res. 2005;73(2–3):333–41.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Dalton SO, et al. Depression and cancer risk: a register-based study of patients hospitalized with affective disorders, Denmark, 1969–1993. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;155(12):1088–95.CrossRefPubMed Dalton SO, et al. Depression and cancer risk: a register-based study of patients hospitalized with affective disorders, Denmark, 1969–1993. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;155(12):1088–95.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Chen MH, et al. Cancer risk in patients with bipolar disorder and unaffected siblings of such patients: a nationwide population-based study. Int J Cancer. 2022;150(10):1579–86.CrossRefPubMed Chen MH, et al. Cancer risk in patients with bipolar disorder and unaffected siblings of such patients: a nationwide population-based study. Int J Cancer. 2022;150(10):1579–86.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Melin BS, et al. Genome-wide association study of glioma subtypes identifies specific differences in genetic susceptibility to glioblastoma and non-glioblastoma tumors. Nat Genet. 2017;49(5):789–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Melin BS, et al. Genome-wide association study of glioma subtypes identifies specific differences in genetic susceptibility to glioblastoma and non-glioblastoma tumors. Nat Genet. 2017;49(5):789–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Burgess S, Small DS, Thompson SG. A review of instrumental variable estimators for mendelian randomization. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017;26(5):2333–55.CrossRefPubMed Burgess S, Small DS, Thompson SG. A review of instrumental variable estimators for mendelian randomization. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017;26(5):2333–55.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Burgess S, Butterworth A, Thompson SG. Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data. Genet Epidemiol. 2013;37(7):658–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Burgess S, Butterworth A, Thompson SG. Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data. Genet Epidemiol. 2013;37(7):658–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Bowden J, et al. Assessing the suitability of summary data for two-sample mendelian randomization analyses using MR-Egger regression: the role of the I2 statistic. Int J Epidemiol. 2016;45(6):1961–74.PubMedPubMedCentral Bowden J, et al. Assessing the suitability of summary data for two-sample mendelian randomization analyses using MR-Egger regression: the role of the I2 statistic. Int J Epidemiol. 2016;45(6):1961–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Burgess S, Thompson SG, Collaboration CCG. Avoiding bias from weak instruments in mendelian randomization studies. Int J Epidemiol. 2011;40(3):755–64.CrossRefPubMed Burgess S, Thompson SG, Collaboration CCG. Avoiding bias from weak instruments in mendelian randomization studies. Int J Epidemiol. 2011;40(3):755–64.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Bowden J, et al. Consistent estimation in mendelian randomization with some Invalid instruments using a weighted median estimator. Genet Epidemiol. 2016;40(4):304–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bowden J, et al. Consistent estimation in mendelian randomization with some Invalid instruments using a weighted median estimator. Genet Epidemiol. 2016;40(4):304–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Burgess S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(2):512–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Burgess S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(2):512–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Verbanck M, et al. Detection of widespread horizontal pleiotropy in causal relationships inferred from mendelian randomization between complex traits and diseases. Nat Genet. 2018;50(5):693–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Verbanck M, et al. Detection of widespread horizontal pleiotropy in causal relationships inferred from mendelian randomization between complex traits and diseases. Nat Genet. 2018;50(5):693–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Xue H, Shen X, Pan W. Constrained maximum likelihood-based mendelian randomization robust to both correlated and uncorrelated pleiotropic effects. Am J Hum Genet. 2021;108(7):1251–69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Xue H, Shen X, Pan W. Constrained maximum likelihood-based mendelian randomization robust to both correlated and uncorrelated pleiotropic effects. Am J Hum Genet. 2021;108(7):1251–69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Greco MF, et al. Detecting pleiotropy in mendelian randomisation studies with summary data and a continuous outcome. Stat Med. 2015;34(21):2926–40.CrossRef Greco MF, et al. Detecting pleiotropy in mendelian randomisation studies with summary data and a continuous outcome. Stat Med. 2015;34(21):2926–40.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Hemani G, Bowden J, Davey Smith G. Evaluating the potential role of pleiotropy in mendelian randomization studies. Hum Mol Genet. 2018;27(R2):R195–R208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hemani G, Bowden J, Davey Smith G. Evaluating the potential role of pleiotropy in mendelian randomization studies. Hum Mol Genet. 2018;27(R2):R195–R208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
19.
go back to reference Yuan K et al. Mendelian randomization and GWAS Meta analysis revealed the risk-increasing effect of Schizophrenia on cancers. Biology (Basel), 2022. 11(9). Yuan K et al. Mendelian randomization and GWAS Meta analysis revealed the risk-increasing effect of Schizophrenia on cancers. Biology (Basel), 2022. 11(9).
20.
go back to reference Preti A. Reduced risk of cancer in schizophrenia: a role for obstetric complications? Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2008;118(3):251–3. author reply 253.CrossRefPubMed Preti A. Reduced risk of cancer in schizophrenia: a role for obstetric complications? Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2008;118(3):251–3. author reply 253.CrossRefPubMed
21.
23.
go back to reference Weng Y, et al. Neuropathways of theory of mind in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022;137:104625.CrossRefPubMed Weng Y, et al. Neuropathways of theory of mind in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022;137:104625.CrossRefPubMed
24.
25.
26.
go back to reference Romero-Garcia R, et al. Transcriptomic and connectomic correlates of differential spatial patterning among gliomas. Brain. 2023;146(3):1200–11.CrossRefPubMed Romero-Garcia R, et al. Transcriptomic and connectomic correlates of differential spatial patterning among gliomas. Brain. 2023;146(3):1200–11.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Reiche EM, Nunes SO, Morimoto HK. Stress, depression, the immune system, and cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5(10):617–25.CrossRefPubMed Reiche EM, Nunes SO, Morimoto HK. Stress, depression, the immune system, and cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5(10):617–25.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Goldacre MJ, et al. Cancer in people with depression or anxiety: record-linkage study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2007;42(9):683–9.CrossRefPubMed Goldacre MJ, et al. Cancer in people with depression or anxiety: record-linkage study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2007;42(9):683–9.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Rooney AG, et al. Frequency, clinical associations, and longitudinal course of major depressive disorder in adults with cerebral glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(32):4307–12.CrossRefPubMed Rooney AG, et al. Frequency, clinical associations, and longitudinal course of major depressive disorder in adults with cerebral glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(32):4307–12.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Sanderson E, et al. The use of negative control outcomes in mendelian randomization to detect potential population stratification. Int J Epidemiol. 2021;50(4):1350–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sanderson E, et al. The use of negative control outcomes in mendelian randomization to detect potential population stratification. Int J Epidemiol. 2021;50(4):1350–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Association between psychiatric disorders and glioma risk: evidence from Mendelian randomization analysis
Authors
Wenzhuo Yang
Yu Han
Changjia He
Sheng Zhong
Fei Ren
Zhongping Chen
Yonggao Mou
Ke Sai
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-11865-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Cancer 1/2024 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine