Cited by 55Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism

Association between genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition and prostate cancer risk: A Mendelian randomisation study

Open access
Fang, Si, Yarmolinsky, James, Gill, Dipender, Bull, Caroline J., Perks, Claire M., the PRACTICAL Consortium, Davey Smith, George, Gaunt, Tom R. +1 more·2023·PLOS Medicine

Abstract

Background: Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the second most prevalent malignancy in men worldwide. Observational studies have linked the use of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) lowering therapies with reduced risk of PrCa, which may potentially be attributable to confounding factors. In this study, we performed a drug target Mendelian randomisation (MR) analysis to evaluate the association of genetically proxied inhibition of LDL-c-lowering drug targets on risk of PrCa. Methods and findings: Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with LDL-c (P < 5 × 10−8) from the Global Lipids Genetics Consortium genome-wide association study (GWAS) (N = 1,320,016) and located in and around the HMGCR, NPC1L1, and PCSK9 genes were used to proxy the therapeutic inhibition of these targets. Summary-level data regarding the risk of total, advanced, and early-onset PrCa were obtained from the PRACTICAL consortium. Validation analyses were performed using genetic instruments from an LDL-c GWAS conducted on male UK Biobank participants of European ancestry (N = 201,678), as well as instruments selected based on liver-derived gene expression and circulation plasma levels of targets. We also investigated whether putative mediators may play a role in findings for traits previously implicated in PrCa risk (i.e., lipoprotein a (Lp(a)), body mass index (BMI), and testosterone). Applying two-sample MR using the inverse-variance weighted approach provided strong evidence supporting an effect of genetically proxied inhibition of PCSK9 (equivalent to a standard deviation (SD) reduction in LDL-c) on lower risk of total PrCa (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.76 to 0.96, P = 9.15 × 10−3) and early-onset PrCa (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52 to 0.95, P = 0.023). Genetically proxied HMGCR inhibition provided a similar central effect estimate on PrCa risk, although with a wider 95% CI (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.13, P = 0.244), whereas genetically proxied NPC1L1 inhibition had an effect on higher PrCa risk with a 95% CI that likewise included the null (OR = 1.34, 95% CI = 0.87 to 2.04, P = 0.180). Analyses using male-stratified instruments provided consistent results. Secondary MR analyses supported a genetically proxied effect of liver-specific PCSK9 expression (OR = 0.90 per SD reduction in PCSK9 expression, 95% CI = 0.86 to 0.95, P = 5.50 × 10−5) and circulating plasma levels of PCSK9 (OR = 0.93 per SD reduction in PCSK9 protein levels, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.997, P = 0.04) on PrCa risk. Colocalization analyses identified strong evidence (posterior probability (PPA) = 81.3%) of a shared genetic variant (rs553741) between liver-derived PCSK9 expression and PrCa risk, whereas weak evidence was found for HMGCR (PPA = 0.33%) and NPC1L1 expression (PPA = 0.38%). Moreover, genetically proxied PCSK9 inhibition was strongly associated with Lp(a) levels (Beta = −0.08, 95% CI = −0.12 to −0.05, P = 1.00 × 10−5), but not BMI or testosterone, indicating a possible role for Lp(a) in the biological mechanism underlying the association between PCSK9 and PrCa. Notably, we emphasise that our estimates are based on a lifelong exposure that makes direct comparisons with trial results challenging. Conclusions: Our study supports a strong association between genetically proxied inhibition of PCSK9 and a lower risk of total and early-onset PrCa, potentially through an alternative mechanism other than the on-target effect on LDL-c. Further evidence from clinical studies is needed to confirm this finding as well as the putative mediatory role of Lp(a).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003988

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fang, S., Yarmolinsky, J., Gill, D., Bull, C. J., Perks, C. M., the PRACTICAL Consortium, Davey Smith, G., Gaunt, T. R., & Richardson, T. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Novo Nordisk (Denmark) (DK)
  • Southmead Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Fang, Si
  • Richardson, Tom G.
Venue
PLOS Medicine
Published
2023-01-03
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
e1003988
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W4313461963
Cited by
55
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 8
FWCI
8.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1, MC_UU_00011/4)
  • Wellcome Trust (108902/Z/15/Z)
  • Cancer Research UK (C68933/A28534)
  • World Cancer Research Fund (IIG_2019_2009)
  • University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
  • University of Bristol
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Keywords
prostate cancer risk, PCSK9 inhibition, LDL cholesterol lowering, HMGCR, NPC1L1, statins, early-onset prostate cancer, genetic instruments, lipoprotein(a), body mass index, testosterone, mediation analysis, confounding by treatment, PRACTICAL consortium, UK Biobank
MeSH terms
Proprotein Convertase 9, Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Prostatic Neoplasms, Testosterone, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Genome-Wide Association Study, Mendelian Randomization Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review