Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous observational studies have reported a possible association between circulating lipids and lipid-lowering drugs and male infertility (MIF), as well as the mediating role of circulating vitamin D. Then, due to issues such as bias, reverse causality, and residual confounding, inferring causal relationships from these studies may be challenging. Therefore, this study aims to explore the effects of circulating lipids and lipid-lowering drugs on MIF through Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis and evaluate the mediating role of vitamin D. METHOD: Genetic variations related to lipid traits and the lipid-lowering effect of lipid modification targets are extracted from the Global Alliance for Lipid Genetics Genome-Wide Association Study. The summary statistics for MIF are from the FinnGen 9th edition. Using quantitative expression feature loci data from relevant organizations to obtain genetic variations related to gene expression level, further to explore the relationship between these target gene expression levels and MIF risk. Two-step MR analysis is used to explore the mediating role of vitamin D. Multiple sensitivity analysis methods (co-localization analysis, Egger intercept test, Cochrane's Q test, pleiotropy residuals and outliers (MR-PRESSO), and the leave-one-out method) are used to demonstrate the reliability of our results. RESULT: In our study, we observed that lipid modification of four lipid-lowering drug targets was associated with MIF risk, the LDLR activator (equivalent to a 1-SD decrease in LDL-C) (OR=1.94, 95% CI 1.14-3.28, FDR=0.040), LPL activator (equivalent to a 1-SD decrease in TG) (OR=1.86, 95% CI 1.25-2.76, FDR=0.022), and CETP inhibitor (equivalent to a 1-SD increase in HDL-C) (OR=1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.53, FDR=0.035) were associated with a higher risk of MIF. The HMGCR inhibitor (equivalent to a 1-SD decrease in LDL-C) was associated with a lower risk of MIF (OR=0.38, 95% CI 0.17-0.83, FDR=0.39). Lipid-modifying effects of three targets were partially mediated by serum vitamin D levels. Mediation was 0.035 (LDLR activator), 0.012 (LPL activator), and 0.030 (CETP inhibitor), with mediation ratios of 5.34% (LDLR activator), 1.94% (LPL activator), and 12.2% (CETP inhibitor), respectively. In addition, there was no evidence that lipid properties and lipid modification effects of six other lipid-lowering drug targets were associated with MIF risk. Multiple sensitivity analysis methods revealed insignificant evidence of bias arising from pleiotropy or genetic confounding. CONCLUSION: This study did not support lipid traits (LDL-C, HDL-C, TG, Apo-A1, and Apo-B) as pathogenic risk factors for MIF. It emphasized that LPL, LDLR, CETP, and HMGCR were promising drug targets for improving male fertility.