Sex‐specific effects of genetically predicted BMI and education on risk of AD

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundExamining sex differences on the impact of modifiable risk factors in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) risk can help us better understand the mechanisms underlying sex differences in the prevalence and incidence of AD. Here, we used polygenic risk scores (PRS) and Mendelian randomization (MR) to investigate sex‐specific effects of sleep duration, insomnia, blood pressure, diabetes, alcohol intake, smoking, body mass index, high cholesterol, and education on AD risk.MethodWe obtained combined and sex‐stratified genome‐wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics for each risk factor from the UK Biobank and used them as the base dataset for constructing PRS and exposure datasets in the MR analysis. Linkage disequilibrium clumping was performed to identify independent genome‐wide significant single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across the sex‐combined, male‐specific, and female‐specific GWAS. The combined lead SNPs were then weighted by their strata‐specific effect sizes in the stratified PRS and MR analyses. PRS were constructed for each risk factor in participants from the Alzheimer’s Disease Genetics Consortium. Linear regression was used to investigate the association of each PRS with AD risk, adjusting for age, principal components, and cohort. MR was used to estimate sex‐stratified causal effects of each risk factor on AD. Sex differences in PRS associations and MR causal estimates were determined using Fisher’s Z score method.ResultsAssociation testing of the PRS with AD risk in sex stratified cohorts revealed that the BMI PRS was associated with differential effects in men and women (OR [95%CI]: males: 1.05 [1.00, 1.10] vs females: 0.96 [0.93, 0.99], p = 0.003). Furthermore, the university completion PRS was non‐significant in men but was associated with reduced risk in women (OR [95%CI]: males: 0.96 [0.92, 1.01] vs females: 0.92 [0.89, 0.96], p = 0.12). In the follow‐up MR analysis, university completion was also causally associated with reduced risk in women only (OR [95%CI]: males: 1.09 [0.77, 1.53] vs females: 0.55 [0.42, 0.72], p = 0.002) (Figure 1). No other risk factors showed evidence of sex‐differences.ConclusionOur study found sex‐specific effects of genetically predicted BMI and educational attainment on AD risk. These findings suggest the need for sex‐specific approaches to AD prevention and management.