Key result
Common mitochondrial haplogroups show no association with CV hospitalizations compared to haplogroup H.
Why the study?
Common mitochondrial haplogroups have been associated with disease risk and longevity, but their relationship with ischemic cardiovascular disease and mortality in a general European population is unclear.
Do common mitochondrial haplogroups predict risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity, mortality, and longevity in a general population of European descent?
Cohort (n=9,254)
Do common mitochondrial haplogroups predict risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity, mortality, and longevity in a general population of European descent?
Common mitochondrial haplogroups do not predict the risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity, or mortality in a general population of European descent.
Mitochondrial haplogroup testing should not inform CV risk assessment; hypothesis-generating for mitochondrial genetics in cardiovascular outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Rare mutations in the mitochondrial genome may cause disease. Mitochondrial haplogroups defined by common polymorphisms have been associated with risk of disease and longevity. We tested the hypothesis that common haplogroups predict risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity from other causes, mortality, and longevity in a general population of European descent. METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed 9254 individuals from the Danish general population, in the Copenhagen City Heart Study, prospectively for risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity from other causes, and mortality during 25 and 11 years, respectively. Haplogroup frequencies were as follows: H (45.9%), U (15.9%), T (9.9%), J (9.1), K (6.2%), V (4.5%), W/I (3.8%), and Z (3.5%). Hazard ratios for hospitalization due to all cardiovascular disorders (haplogroup U: 1.0 [95% confidence interval{CI}, 0.9 to 1.1]; T: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.0]; J: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.1]; K: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.2]; V: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.2]; W/I: 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.0]; Z: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.2]), ischemic heart disease (U: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.1]; T: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.0]; J: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.2]; K: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.3]; V: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4]; W/I: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.4]; Z: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.4]), and ischemic cerebrovascular disease (U: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4]; T: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.2]; J: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4]; K: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.4]; V: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.5]; W/I: 0.8 [95% CI, 0.5 to 1.3]; Z: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.4]) did not differ from 1.0 for any haplogroup versus the most common haplogroup H. Results were similar for hospitalization due to infectious and parasitic diseases, respiratory infections, respiratory disorders, malignant neoplasms, digestive disorders, musculoskeletal disorders, neuropsychiatric disorders, and miscarriages. Likewise, hazard ratios for death from all causes were not different from 1.0 for any haplogroup versus haplogroup H (U: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.1]; T: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.1]; J: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.1]; K: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.2]; V: 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.3]; W/I: 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.1]; Z: 0.9 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.2]). Finally, after stratification by major causes of death, hazard ratios remained insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support an association of mitochondrial haplogroups with risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease, morbidity from other causes, mortality, or longevity in a large general population of European descent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benn et al. (2008) conducted a cohort in General population (n=9,254). Mitochondrial haplogroups (U, T, J, K, V, W/I, Z) vs. Haplogroup H was evaluated on Hospitalization due to all cardiovascular disorders (Haplogroup U vs H) (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.1). Common mitochondrial haplogroups were not associated with hospitalization for cardiovascular disorders compared to the most common haplogroup H (e.g., haplogroup U HR 1.0; 95% CI 0.9-1.1).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: