Brain, behavior, and immunity · 2024
Protein signatures associated with loneliness and social isolation: Plasma proteome analyses in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, with causal evidence from Mendelian randomization.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gong Jessica, Preminger Zohar, Steptoe Andrew, Fancourt Daisy
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The understanding of biological pathways related to loneliness and social isolation remains incomplete. Cutting-edge population-based proteomics offers opportunities to uncover novel biological pathways linked to social deficits.
METHODS: This study employed a proteome-wide and data-driven approach to estimate the cross-sectional associations between objective measures of social connections (i.e., social isolation) and subjective measures (i.e., loneliness) with protein abundance, using the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.
RESULTS: Greater social isolation was associated with higher levels of 11 proteins (TNFRSF10A, MMP12, TRAIL-R2, SKR3, TNFRSF11A, VSIG2, PRSS8, FGFR2, KIM1, REN, and NEFL) after minimal adjustments; and three proteins were significantly associated after full adjustments (TNFRSF10A, TNFRSF11A, and HAOX1). Findings from two-sample Mendelian randomization indicated that a lower frequency of in-person social contact with friends or family causally increased levels of TNFRSF10A, TRAIL-R2, TNFRSF11A, and KIM1, and decreased the level of NEFL. The study also highlighted several enriched biological pathways, including necrosis and cell death regulation, dimerization of procaspase-8, and inhibition of caspase-8 pathways, which have previously not been linked to social deficits.
CONCLUSION: These findings could help explain the relationship between social deficits and disease, confirming the importance of continuing to explore novel biological pathways associated with social deficits.
METHODS: This study employed a proteome-wide and data-driven approach to estimate the cross-sectional associations between objective measures of social connections (i.e., social isolation) and subjective measures (i.e., loneliness) with protein abundance, using the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.
RESULTS: Greater social isolation was associated with higher levels of 11 proteins (TNFRSF10A, MMP12, TRAIL-R2, SKR3, TNFRSF11A, VSIG2, PRSS8, FGFR2, KIM1, REN, and NEFL) after minimal adjustments; and three proteins were significantly associated after full adjustments (TNFRSF10A, TNFRSF11A, and HAOX1). Findings from two-sample Mendelian randomization indicated that a lower frequency of in-person social contact with friends or family causally increased levels of TNFRSF10A, TRAIL-R2, TNFRSF11A, and KIM1, and decreased the level of NEFL. The study also highlighted several enriched biological pathways, including necrosis and cell death regulation, dimerization of procaspase-8, and inhibition of caspase-8 pathways, which have previously not been linked to social deficits.
CONCLUSION: These findings could help explain the relationship between social deficits and disease, confirming the importance of continuing to explore novel biological pathways associated with social deficits.