TY - JOUR
T1 - Socioeconomic disadvantage and polygenic risk of overweight in early and mid-life
T2 - a longitudinal population cohort study spanning 12 years
AU - Kerr, Jessica A.
AU - Dumuid, Dorothea
AU - Downes, Marnie
AU - Lange, Katherine
AU - O'Connor, Meredith
AU - Stanford, Ty
AU - Thornton, Lukar
AU - Mavoa, Suzanne
AU - Lycett, Kate
AU - Olds, Tim S.
AU - Edwards, Ben
AU - O'Sullivan, Justin
AU - Juonala, Markus
AU - Le, Ha N.D.
AU - Saffery, Richard
AU - Burgner, David
AU - Wake, Melissa
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - Background: We describe BMI by socioeconomic disadvantage and by polygenic risk in parallel cohorts of children and adults (their parents). We examine whether hypothetically intervening to reduce childhood disadvantage could reduce adolescent obesity. Methods: From a population-based cohort (N = 5107) with a mixed design (survey and direct assessment), 24–31% had genotype data: 1607 children (50% male) followed biennially from age 2–3 to 14–15; 2406 adults (36% male) followed from mean age 35–47 years. Exposures were polygenic risk score for BMI, and neighbourhood- and family-level socioeconomic disadvantage categorised as ‘most’ (top two cohort-specific quintiles), ‘average’, or ‘least’ disadvantage (bottom two quintiles). We explored trends in estimated BMI and risk of overweight/obesity by disadvantage, stratified by polygenic risk. We used generalised linear regression to estimate the reduction in overweight/obesity at 14–15 years in children living in ‘least/average disadvantage’ in early childhood relative to those in ‘most disadvantage’, adjusted for confounders. Causal effect estimates were obtained separately for children with higher and lower polygenic risk. Findings: A positive trend between disadvantage and overweight/obesity was most apparent among participants with high polygenic risk. Among children with higher polygenic risk (n = 805), hypothetical target trial results imply that intervening to lessen population-wide neighbourhood disadvantage from most to least disadvantage could reduce adolescent overweight/obesity by 32% (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.92), or by 42% if intervening to lessen family disadvantage (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42–0.79). Positive effects were smaller when isolating the population to those with lower polygenic risk (7–17%), and for the whole population, regardless of polygenic risk (25–39%). Interpretation: Children at higher polygenic risk of obesity suffer disproportionate BMI impacts of disadvantage. At the population-level, and especially for those with higher polygenic risk, tackling disadvantage could potentially reduce obesity and associated morbidity, mortality, and costs. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Funding information is detailed in the funding statement.
AB - Background: We describe BMI by socioeconomic disadvantage and by polygenic risk in parallel cohorts of children and adults (their parents). We examine whether hypothetically intervening to reduce childhood disadvantage could reduce adolescent obesity. Methods: From a population-based cohort (N = 5107) with a mixed design (survey and direct assessment), 24–31% had genotype data: 1607 children (50% male) followed biennially from age 2–3 to 14–15; 2406 adults (36% male) followed from mean age 35–47 years. Exposures were polygenic risk score for BMI, and neighbourhood- and family-level socioeconomic disadvantage categorised as ‘most’ (top two cohort-specific quintiles), ‘average’, or ‘least’ disadvantage (bottom two quintiles). We explored trends in estimated BMI and risk of overweight/obesity by disadvantage, stratified by polygenic risk. We used generalised linear regression to estimate the reduction in overweight/obesity at 14–15 years in children living in ‘least/average disadvantage’ in early childhood relative to those in ‘most disadvantage’, adjusted for confounders. Causal effect estimates were obtained separately for children with higher and lower polygenic risk. Findings: A positive trend between disadvantage and overweight/obesity was most apparent among participants with high polygenic risk. Among children with higher polygenic risk (n = 805), hypothetical target trial results imply that intervening to lessen population-wide neighbourhood disadvantage from most to least disadvantage could reduce adolescent overweight/obesity by 32% (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.92), or by 42% if intervening to lessen family disadvantage (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42–0.79). Positive effects were smaller when isolating the population to those with lower polygenic risk (7–17%), and for the whole population, regardless of polygenic risk (25–39%). Interpretation: Children at higher polygenic risk of obesity suffer disproportionate BMI impacts of disadvantage. At the population-level, and especially for those with higher polygenic risk, tackling disadvantage could potentially reduce obesity and associated morbidity, mortality, and costs. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Funding information is detailed in the funding statement.
KW - Adolescent
KW - Adult
KW - Intervention
KW - Obesity
KW - Overweight
KW - Polygenic risk
KW - Socioeconomic disadvantage
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85208668391&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2024.101231
DO - 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2024.101231
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85208668391
SN - 2666-6065
VL - 53
JO - The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
JF - The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
M1 - 101231
ER -