BACKGROUND: the associations of adiposity with aggressive prostate cancer risk are unclear. Using two-sample Mendelian randomization, we assessed the association of metabolically unfavourable adiposity (UFA), favourable adiposity (FA) and for comparison body mass index (BMI), with prostate cancer, including aggressive prostate cancer. METHODS: We examined the association of these genetically predicted adiposity-related traits with risk of prostate cancer overall, aggressive and early onset disease using outcome summary statistics from the PRACTICAL consortium (including 15,167 aggressive cases). RESULTS: in inverse-variance weighted models, there was little evidence that genetically predicted one standard deviation higher UFA, FA and BMI were associated with aggressive prostate cancer [OR: 0.85 (95% CI:0.61-1.19), 0.80 (0.53-1.23) and 0.97 (0.88-1.08), respectively]; these associations were largely consistent in sensitivity analyses accounting for horizontal pleiotropy. There was no strong evidence that genetically determined UFA, FA or BMI were associated with overall prostate cancer or early age of onset prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find differences in the associations of UFA and FA with prostate cancer risk, which suggest that adiposity is unlikely to influence prostate cancer via the metabolic factors assessed; however, these did not cover some aspects related to metabolic health that may link obesity with aggressive prostate cancer, which should be explored in future studies.

Background:Some individuals living with obesity may be relatively metabolically healthy, whilst others suffer from multiple conditions that may be linked to adverse metabolic effects or other factors. The extent to which the adverse metabolic component of obesity contributes to disease compared to the non-metabolic components is often uncertain. We aimed to use Mendelian randomisation (MR) and specific genetic variants to separately test the causal roles of higher adiposity with and without its adverse metabolic effects on diseases.Methods:We selected 37 chronic diseases associated with obesity and genetic variants associated with different aspects of excess weight. These genetic variants included those associated with metabolically ‘favourable adiposity’ (FA) and ‘unfavourable adiposity’ (UFA) that are both associated with higher adiposity but with opposite effects on metabolic risk. We used these variants and two sample MR to test the effects on the chronic diseases.Results:MR identified two sets of diseases. First, 11 conditions where the metabolic effect of higher adiposity is the likely primary cause of the disease. Here, MR with the FA and UFA genetics showed opposing effects on risk of disease: coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, hypertension, stroke, type 2 diabetes, polycystic ovary syndrome, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, renal cancer, and gout. Second, 9 conditions where the non-metabolic effects of excess weight (e.g. mechanical effect) are likely a cause. Here, MR with the FA genetics, despite leading to lower metabolic risk, and MR with the UFA genetics, both indicated higher disease risk: osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gallstones, adult-onset asthma, psoriasis, deep vein thrombosis, and venous thromboembolism.Conclusions:Our results assist in understanding the consequences of higher adiposity uncoupled from its adverse metabolic effects, including the risks to individuals with high body mass index who may be relatively metabolically healthy.Funding:Diabetes UK, UK Medical Research Council, World Cancer Research Fund, National Cancer Institute.

. OBJECTIVE
. Fat content and volume of liver and pancreas are associated with risk of diabetes in observational studies; whether these associations are causal is unknown. We conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) study to examine causality of such associations.
.
.
. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
. We used genetic variants associated (P < 5 × 10−8) with the exposures (liver and pancreas volume and fat content) using MRI scans of UK Biobank participants (n = 32,859). We obtained summary-level data for risk of type 1 (9,358 cases) and type 2 (55,005 cases) diabetes from the largest available genome-wide association studies. We performed inverse-variance weighted MR as main analysis and several sensitivity analyses to assess pleiotropy and to exclude variants with potential pleiotropic effects.
.
.
. RESULTS
. Observationally, liver fat and volume were associated with type 2 diabetes (odds ratio per 1 SD higher exposure 2.16 [2.02, 2.31] and 2.11 [1.96, 2.27], respectively). Pancreatic fat was associated with type 2 diabetes (1.42 [1.34, 1.51]) but not type 1 diabetes, and pancreas volume was negatively associated with type 1 diabetes (0.42 [0.36, 0.48]) and type 2 diabetes (0.73 [0.68, 0.78]). MR analysis provided evidence only for a causal role of liver fat and pancreas volume in risk of type 2 diabetes (1.27 [1.08, 1.49] or 27% increased risk and 0.76 [0.62, 0.94] or 24% decreased risk per 1SD, respectively) and no causal associations with type 1 diabetes.
.
.
. CONCLUSIONS
. Our findings assist in understanding the causal role of ectopic fat in the liver and pancreas and of organ volume in the pathophysiology of type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
.

The paper outlines several approaches for dealing with meta-analyses of count outcome data. These counts are the accumulation of occurred events, and these events might be rare, so a special feature of the meta-analysis is dealing with low counts including zero-count studies. Emphasis is put on approaches which are state of the art for count data modelling including mixed log-linear (Poisson) and mixed logistic (binomial) regression as well as nonparametric mixture models for count data of Poisson and binomial type. A simulation study investigates the performance and capability of discrete mixture models in estimating effect heterogeneity. The approaches are exemplified on a meta-analytic case study investigating the acceptance of bibliotherapy.

To understand the causal role of adiposity and ectopic fat in type 2 diabetes and cardiometabolic diseases, we aimed to identify two clusters of adiposity genetic variants: one with "adverse" metabolic effects (UFA) and the other with, paradoxically, "favorable" metabolic effects (FA). We performed a multivariate genome-wide association study using body fat percentage and metabolic biomarkers from UK Biobank and identified 38 UFA and 36 FA variants. Adiposity-increasing alleles were associated with an adverse metabolic profile, higher risk of disease, higher CRP, and higher fat in subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue, liver, and pancreas for UFA and a favorable metabolic profile, lower risk of disease, higher CRP and higher subcutaneous adipose tissue but lower liver fat for FA. We detected no sexual dimorphism. The Mendelian randomization studies provided evidence for a risk-increasing effect of UFA and protective effect of FA for type 2 diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, stroke, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and polycystic ovary syndrome. FA is distinct from UFA by its association with lower liver fat and protection from cardiometabolic diseases; it was not associated with visceral or pancreatic fat. Understanding the difference in FA and UFA may lead to new insights in preventing, predicting, and treating cardiometabolic diseases.

AbstractAimsChange in weight, HbA1c, lipids, blood pressure and cardiometabolic events over time is variable in individuals with type 2 diabetes. We hypothesised that people with a genetic predisposition to a more favourable adiposity distribution could have a less severe clinical course/progression.MethodsWe involved people with type 2 diabetes from two UK‐based cohorts: 11,914 individuals with GP follow‐up data from the UK Biobank and 723 from Salford. We generated a ‘favourable adiposity’ genetic score and conducted cross‐sectional and longitudinal studies to test its association with weight, BMI, lipids, blood pressure, medication use and risk of myocardial infarction and stroke using 15 follow‐up time points with 1‐year intervals.ResultsThe ‘favourable adiposity’ genetic score was cross‐sectionally associated with higher weight (effect size per 1 standard deviation higher genetic score: 0.91 kg [0.59,1.23]) and BMI (0.30 kg/m2 [0.19,0.40]), but higher high‐density lipoprotein (0.02 mmol/L [0.01,0.02]) and lower triglycerides (−0.04 mmol/L [−0.07, −0.02]) in the UK Biobank at baseline, and this pattern of association was consistent across follow‐up.There was a trend for participants with higher ‘favourable adiposity’ genetic score to have lower risk of myocardial infarction and/or stroke (odds ratio 0.79 [0.62, 1.00]) compared to those with lower score. A one standard deviation higher score was associated with lower odds of using lipid‐lowering (0.91 [0.86, 0.97]) and anti‐hypertensive medication (0.95 [0.91, 0.99]).ConclusionsIn individuals with type 2 diabetes, having more ‘favourable adiposity’ alleles is associated with a marginally better lipid profile long‐term and having lower odds of requiring lipid‐lowering or anti‐hypertensive medication in spite of relatively higher adiposity.

Higher adiposity is an established risk factor for psychiatric diseases including depression and anxiety. The associations between adiposity and depression may be explained by the metabolic consequences and/or by the psychosocial impact of higher adiposity. We performed one- and two- sample Mendelian randomization (MR) in up to 145 668 European participants from the UK Biobank to test for a causal effect of higher adiposity on 10 well-validated mental health and well-being outcomes derived using the Mental Health Questionnaire (MHQ). We used three sets of adiposity genetic instruments: (a) a set of 72 BMI genetic variants, (b) a set of 36 favourable adiposity variants and (c) a set of 38 unfavourable adiposity variants. We additionally tested causal relationships (1) in men and women separately, (2) in a subset of individuals not taking antidepressants and (3) in non-linear MR models. Two-sample MR provided evidence that a genetically determined one standard deviation (1-SD) higher BMI (4.6 kg/m2) was associated with higher odds of current depression [OR: 1.50, 95%CI: 1.15, 1.95] and lower well-being [ß: -0.15, 95%CI: -0.26, -0.04]. Findings were similar when using the metabolically favourable and unfavourable adiposity variants, with higher adiposity associated with higher odds of depression and lower well-being scores. Our study provides further evidence that higher BMI causes higher odds of depression and lowers well-being. Using genetics to separate out metabolic and psychosocial effects, our study suggests that in the absence of adverse metabolic effects higher adiposity remains causal to depression and lowers well-being.