Evidence Hub

Association of the VDR translation start site polymorphism and fracture risk in older women

Moffett SP, Zmuda JM, Cauley JA, Ensrud KE, Hillier TA, Hochberg MC, Li J, Cayabyab S et al.

Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, 2007

6,698 participants

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We evaluated the association between the VDR translation start site polymorphism and osteoporotic phenotypes among 6698 older white women. Women with the C/C genotype had lower wrist BMD and an increased risk of wrist and all non-spine/low-trauma fractures. The high frequency of this variant confers a population attributable risk that is similar to several established risk factors for fracture.

INTRODUCTION: The vitamin D receptor (VDR) is a nuclear receptor that regulates bone formation, bone resorption, and calcium homeostasis. A common C to T polymorphism in exon 2 of the VDR gene introduces a new translation start site and a protein that differs in length by three amino acids (T = 427aa, C = 424aa; rs10735810).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted genetic association analyses of this polymorphism, BMD, and fracture outcomes in a prospective cohort of 6698 white American women >or=65 years of age. Incident fractures were confirmed by physician adjudication of radiology reports. There were 2532 incident nontraumatic/nonvertebral fractures during 13.6 yr of follow-up including 509 wrist and 703 hip fractures.

RESULTS: Women with the C/C genotype had somewhat lower distal radius BMD compared with those with the T/T genotype (CC=0.358 g/cm(2), CT=0.361 g/cm(2), TT=0.369 g/cm(2), p=0.003). The C/C genotype was also associated with increased risk of non-spine, low traumatic fractures (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.33) and wrist fractures (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.75)…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 6,698 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free