Abstract
Background It has been hypothesised that greater maternal adiposity before or during pregnancy causes greater offspring adiposity in childhood and adulthood, via causal intrauterine or periconceptional mechanisms. Previous Mendelian randomization (MR) estimates were imprecise, with wide confidence intervals that included potentially important protective or adverse effects, and may have been biased by collider effects or imperfect adjustment for genetic inheritance. Here we use an improved MR approach to investigate whether associations between maternal pre-/early pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and offspring adiposity from birth to adolescence are causal, or are instead due to confounding.
Methods and findings We undertook confounder adjusted multivariable (MV) regression and Mendelian randomization (MR) using mother-offspring pairs from two UK cohorts: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) and Born in Bradford (BiB). In ALSPAC and BiB the outcomes were birthweight (BW; N = 9339) and BMI at age 1 (N = 8659) and 4 years (N = 7575), and in ALSPAC only we investigated BMI at 10 (N = 4476) and 15 years (N = 4112) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) determined fat mass index (FMI) from age 10– 18 years (N = 2659 to 3855). We compared MR results from several polygenic risk scores (PRS), calculated from maternal non-transmitted alleles at between 29 and 80,939 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). MV and MR showed a consistent positive association of maternal BMI with BW, but for adiposity at most older ages MR estimates were weaker than MV estimates. In MV regression a one standard deviation (SD) higher maternal BMI was associated with a 0.13 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10, 0.16) SD increase in offspring BW. The corresponding MR estimate from the strongest PRS (including up to 80,939 SNPs) was 0.14 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.23), with no difference between the two estimates (Pdifference = 0.84). For 15 year BMI the MV and MR estimates (80,939 SNPs) were 0.32 (95% CI: 0.29, 0.36) and 0.13 (95% CI: 0.01, 0.24) respectively (Pdifference = 1.0e-3). Results for FMI were similar to those for adolescent BMI. As the number of SNPs included in the PRS increased, the MR confidence intervals narrowed and the effect estimates for adolescent adiposity became closer to the MV estimates. Sensitivity analyses suggested the stronger effects with more SNPs were explained by horizontal pleiotropic bias away from zero. Consequently, the unbiased difference between the MV and MR estimates is probably greater than shown in our main analyses. Furthermore, MR estimates from IVs with fewer SNPs provided no strong evidence for a causal effect on adolescent adiposity.
Conclusions Our results suggest that higher maternal pre-/early-pregnancy BMI is not a key driver of higher adiposity in the next generation. Thus, they support interventions that target the whole population for reducing overweight and obesity, rather than a specific focus on women of reproductive age.
Competing Interest Statement
DAL has received support from numerous national and international government and charity funders and from Medtronic LTD and Roche Diagnostics for research unconnected with that presented in this study. GCP is an employee of 23andMe Inc and may hold stock or stock options. All other authors report no conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (102215/2/13/2) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. Genotyping of the ALSPAC maternal samples was funded by the Wellcome Trust (WT088806) and the offspring samples were genotyped by Sample Logistics and Genotyping Facilities at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute and LabCorp (Laboratory Corporation of America) using support from 23andMe. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf). BiB receives core infrastructure funding from the Wellcome Trust (WT101597MA), a joint grant from the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) and UK Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC) (MR/N024397/1), the British Heart Foundation (CS/16/4/32482) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Collaboration for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for Yorkshire and Humber. Further support for genome-wide data is from the UK Medical Research Council (G0600705) and the National Institute of Health Research (NF-SI-0611-10196). The work presented here was also supported by the US National Institute of Health (R01 DK10324), the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)/ERC grant agreement (669545) and the British Heart Foundation (AA/18/7/34219). TAB is supported by the Medical Research Council (MRC) (UK) (MR/K501281/1), TAB and DME are supported by the NHMRC (Australia) (GNT1183074 and GNT1157714), DAL, TAB and RCR work in/are affiliated with a unit that is supported by the UK Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1 & MC_UU_00011/6) and DAL is a NIHR Senior Investigator (NF-0616-10102). DAL and TAB are supported by the British Heart Foundation Accelerator Award at the University of Bristol (AA/18/7/34219). VK is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant (721567). MRJ is funded by EU-H2020 LifeCycle Action (733206), EU-H2020 EDCMET (825762), EU-H2020 EUCAN Connect (824989), EU H2020-MSCA-ITN-2016 CAPICE Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant (721567) and the MRC (UK) (MRC/BBSRC and MR/S03658X/1 [JPI HDHL]). RCR is a de Pass Vice Chancellor's Research Fellow at the University of Bristol. AL and MRJ are supported by the MRC (UK) (MR/M013138/1) and the European Union Horizon 2020 programme (633595). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees, and Bradford National Health Service Ethics Committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The ALSPAC study website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/our-data/) contains details of all the data that are available through a fully searchable data dictionary and variable search tool. Scientists are encouraged and able to use BiB data. Data requests are made to the BiB executive using the form available from the study website http://www.borninbradford.nhs.uk (please click on 'Science and Research' to access the form). Guidance for researchers and collaborators, the study protocol and the data collection schedule are all available via the website. All requests are carefully considered and accepted where possible. UK Biobank data are available from the UK Biobank (http://biobank.ndph.ox.ac.uk/showcase/).