Premium
Polyunsaturated fatty acids and risk of melanoma: A M endelian randomisation analysis
Author(s) -
Liyanage Upekha E.,
Law Matthew H.,
Ong Jue Sheng,
Cust Anne E.,
Mann Graham J.,
Ward Sarah V.,
Gharahkhani Puya,
Iles Mark M.,
MacGregor Stuart
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
international journal of cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.475
H-Index - 234
eISSN - 1097-0215
pISSN - 0020-7136
DOI - 10.1002/ijc.31334
Subject(s) - polyunsaturated fatty acid , melanoma , odds ratio , medicine , confounding , confidence interval , meta analysis , eicosapentaenoic acid , docosahexaenoic acid , oncology , genome wide association study , genotype , biology , single nucleotide polymorphism , genetics , fatty acid , cancer research , biochemistry , gene
Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer, mainly affecting populations of European ancestry. Some observational studies suggest that particular diets reduce melanoma risk, putatively through an increase in polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) consumption. However, interpretation of these observational findings is difficult due to residual confounding or reverse causality. To date, a randomized controlled trial has not been carried out to examine the relationship between PUFAs and melanoma. Hence, we performed a Mendelian randomisation (MR) study to evaluate the link between PUFAs and melanoma. To perform MR, we used summary results from the largest risk genome‐wide association study (GWAS) meta‐analysis of melanoma, consisting of 12,874 cases and 23,203 controls. As instrumental variables we selected SNPs associated with PUFA levels from a GWAS meta‐analysis of PUFA levels, from the CHARGE consortium. We used the inverse variance weighted method to estimate a causal odds ratio. To aid interpretation, we established a benchmark “large” predicted change in PUFAs in which, for example, an increase in docosahexaenoic acid (DPA) of 0.17 units (equal to 1 standard deviation) moves a person from the 17 th percentile to the median. Raising PUFA levels by a large amount (increasing DPA by 0.17 units) only negligibly changed melanoma risk: odds ratio [OR] = 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.96–1.10). Other PUFAs yielded similar results as DPA. Our MR analysis suggests that the effect of PUFA levels on melanoma risk is either zero or very small.