AUTHOR=Ying Jiacheng , Wang Binyan , Han Shuyang , Song Jie , Liu Ke , Chen Weiwei , Sun Xiaohui , Mao Yingying , Ye Ding TITLE=Genetically predicted iron status was associated with the risk of prostate cancer JOURNAL=Frontiers in Oncology VOLUME=Volume 12 - 2022 YEAR=2022 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/oncology/articles/10.3389/fonc.2022.959892 DOI=10.3389/fonc.2022.959892 ISSN=2234-943X ABSTRACT=Introduction

Observational studies have reported a relationship between iron status and the risk of prostate cancer. However, it remains uncertain whether the association is causal or due to confounding or reverse causality. To further clarify the underlying causal relationship, we conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis.

Methods

We selected three genetic variants (rs1800562, rs1799945, and rs855791) closely correlated with four iron status biomarkers (serum iron, log-transformed ferritin, transferrin saturation, and transferrin) as instrumental variables. Summary statistics for prostate cancer were obtained from the Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer Associated Alterations in the Genome consortium including 79,148 cases and 61,106 controls of European ancestry. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was conducted primarily to estimate the association of genetically predicted iron status and the risk of prostate cancer, supplemented with simple-median, weighted-median and maximum-likelihood methods as sensitivity analysis. MR-Egger regression was used to detect directional pleiotropy. We also conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies to assess the associations between iron status and the risk of prostate cancer.

Results

Genetically predicted increased iron status was associated with the decreased risk of prostate cancer, with odds ratio of 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84, 0.99; P = 0.035] for serum iron, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.65, 1.00; P = 0.046) for log- transformed ferritin, 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.99; P = 0.029) for transferrin saturation, and 1.15 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.35; P = 0.084) for transferrin (with higher transferrin levels representing lower systemic iron status), using the inverse-variance weighted method. Sensitivity analyses produced consistent associations, and MR-Egger regression indicated no potential pleiotropy. Our replication analysis based on FinnGen research project showed compatible results with our main analysis. Results from our meta-analysis similarly showed that serum ferritin [standardized mean difference (SMD): −1.25; 95% CI: −2.34, −0.16; P = 0.024] and transferrin saturation (SMD: −1.19; 95% CI: −2.34, −0.05; P = 0.042) were lower in patients with prostate cancer compared with that in controls.

Discussion

Our study suggests a protective role of iron in the risk of prostate cancer, further investigations are required to clarify the underlying mechanisms.