Genetic Evidence for Causal Relationships Between Circulating Cathepsin Levels and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Mendelian Randomization Study.
{"title":"Genetic Evidence for Causal Relationships Between Circulating Cathepsin Levels and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Mendelian Randomization Study.","authors":"Chao Duan, Ao Zhang, Suyan Tian","doi":"10.15326/jcopdf.2025.0626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cathepsins, a family of lysosomal proteolytic enzymes, have been implicated in the pathogenesis of various complex diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the causal relationship between cathepsins and COPD remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study employed Mendelian randomization (MR) to investigate the potential causal effects of cathepsin levels on COPD risk. This MR analysis utilized genetic data from individuals of European ancestry in the INTERVAL study and FinnGen consortium. Specifically, summary-level genetic data for 9 cathepsins (B, E, F, G, H, O, L2, S, and Z) were obtained from the INTERVAL study, while COPD summary statistics were sourced from the FinnGen consortium. We conducted comprehensive MR analyses, including univariable MR, reverse MR, multivariable MR (MVMR), and MR least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, to assess causal relationships between cathepsin levels and COPD risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Univariable MR analysis revealed no significant causal relationships (forward or reverse) between the 9 cathepsins and COPD risk. However, MVMR analysis identified cathepsins O and S as having direct causal effects on COPD. For cathepsins O and S, odds ratio was estimated as 1.130 (<i>p</i>=0.022, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.018-1.255) and 1.068 (<i>p</i>=0.025, 95% CI = 1.008-1.132), respectively. Furthermore, these 2 cathepsins were independent risk factors for COPD after adjusting for smoking.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To our knowledge, this is the first MR study to systematically evaluate the causal role of cathepsins in COPD. Further research, particularly clinical trials, is warranted to validate these associations and explore the therapeutic potential of targeting cathepsins in COPD management.</p>","PeriodicalId":51340,"journal":{"name":"Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases-Journal of the Copd Foundation","volume":" ","pages":"380-389"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases-Journal of the Copd Foundation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.2025.0626","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Cathepsins, a family of lysosomal proteolytic enzymes, have been implicated in the pathogenesis of various complex diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the causal relationship between cathepsins and COPD remains unclear.
Methods: This study employed Mendelian randomization (MR) to investigate the potential causal effects of cathepsin levels on COPD risk. This MR analysis utilized genetic data from individuals of European ancestry in the INTERVAL study and FinnGen consortium. Specifically, summary-level genetic data for 9 cathepsins (B, E, F, G, H, O, L2, S, and Z) were obtained from the INTERVAL study, while COPD summary statistics were sourced from the FinnGen consortium. We conducted comprehensive MR analyses, including univariable MR, reverse MR, multivariable MR (MVMR), and MR least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, to assess causal relationships between cathepsin levels and COPD risk.
Results: Univariable MR analysis revealed no significant causal relationships (forward or reverse) between the 9 cathepsins and COPD risk. However, MVMR analysis identified cathepsins O and S as having direct causal effects on COPD. For cathepsins O and S, odds ratio was estimated as 1.130 (p=0.022, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.018-1.255) and 1.068 (p=0.025, 95% CI = 1.008-1.132), respectively. Furthermore, these 2 cathepsins were independent risk factors for COPD after adjusting for smoking.
Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first MR study to systematically evaluate the causal role of cathepsins in COPD. Further research, particularly clinical trials, is warranted to validate these associations and explore the therapeutic potential of targeting cathepsins in COPD management.