Global Search

Search articles, concepts, and chapters

OphthalmologyJune 202330 citations

The Association of Physical Activity with Glaucoma and Related Traits in the UK Biobank.

Madjedi Kian M, Stuart Kelsey V, Chua Sharon Y L, Ramulu Pradeep Y, Warwick Alasdair, Luben Robert N, Sun Zihan, Chia Mark A, Aschard Hugues, Wiggs Janey L


AI Summary

This study found physical activity wasn't linked to glaucoma status or IOP, but higher activity was associated with thicker macular ganglion cell layer, suggesting potential retinal health benefits.

Abstract

Purpose

To examine the association of physical activity (PA) with glaucoma and related traits, to assess whether genetic predisposition to glaucoma modified these associations, and to probe causal relationships using Mendelian randomization (MR).

Design

Cross-sectional observational and gene-environment interaction analyses in the UK Biobank. Two-sample MR experiments using summary statistics from large genetic consortia.

Participants

UK Biobank participants with data on self-reported or accelerometer-derived PA and intraocular pressure (IOP; n = 94 206 and n = 27 777, respectively), macular inner retinal OCT measurements (n = 36 274 and n = 9991, respectively), and glaucoma status (n = 86 803 and n = 23 556, respectively).

Methods

We evaluated multivariable-adjusted associations of self-reported (International Physical Activity Questionnaire) and accelerometer-derived PA with IOP and macular inner retinal OCT parameters using linear regression and with glaucoma status using logistic regression. For all outcomes, we examined gene-PA interactions using a polygenic risk score (PRS) that combined the effects of 2673 genetic variants associated with glaucoma.

Main outcome measures

Intraocular pressure, macular retinal nerve fiber layer (mRNFL) thickness, macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (mGCIPL) thickness, and glaucoma status.

Results

In multivariable-adjusted regression models, we found no association of PA level or time spent in PA with glaucoma status. Higher overall levels and greater time spent in higher levels of both self-reported and accelerometer-derived PA were associated positively with thicker mGCIPL (P < 0.001 for trend for each). Compared with the lowest quartile of PA, participants in the highest quartiles of accelerometer-derived moderate- and vigorous-intensity PA showed a thicker mGCIPL by +0.57 μm (P < 0.001) and +0.42 μm (P = 0.005). No association was found with mRNFL thickness. High overall level of self-reported PA was associated with a modestly higher IOP of +0.08 mmHg (P = 0.01), but this was not replicated in the accelerometry data. No associations were modified by a glaucoma PRS, and MR analyses did not support a causal relationship between PA and any glaucoma-related outcome.

Conclusions

Higher overall PA level and greater time spent in moderate and vigorous PA were not associated with glaucoma status but were associated with thicker mGCIPL. Associations with IOP were modest and inconsistent. Despite the well-documented acute reduction in IOP after PA, we found no evidence that high levels of habitual PA are associated with glaucoma status or IOP in the general population.

Financial disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.


MeSH Terms

HumansBiological Specimen BanksCross-Sectional StudiesGlaucomaIntraocular PressureMacula LuteaRetinal Ganglion CellsTomography, Optical CoherenceUnited KingdomMendelian Randomization Analysis

Key Concepts5

In multivariable-adjusted regression models from a cross-sectional observational study in the UK Biobank, no association was found between physical activity (PA) level or time spent in PA and glaucoma status among 86,803 participants with self-reported PA data and 23,556 participants with accelerometer-derived PA data.

EpidemiologyCross-sectionalCross-sectional observational studyn=86,803 and 23,556 participantsCh10

In multivariable-adjusted regression models from a cross-sectional observational study in the UK Biobank, higher overall levels and greater time spent in higher levels of both self-reported and accelerometer-derived physical activity (PA) were associated positively with thicker macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (mGCIPL) (P < 0.001 for trend for each) among 36,274 participants with self-reported PA data and 9,991 participants with accelerometer-derived PA data.

EpidemiologyCross-sectionalCross-sectional observational studyn=36,274 and 9,991 participantsCh5Ch10

Compared with the lowest quartile of physical activity (PA), participants in the highest quartiles of accelerometer-derived moderate- and vigorous-intensity PA showed a thicker macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (mGCIPL) by +0.57 μm (P < 0.001) and +0.42 μm (P = 0.005) respectively, in a cross-sectional observational study in the UK Biobank involving 9,991 participants with accelerometer-derived PA data and macular inner retinal OCT measurements.

EpidemiologyCross-sectionalCross-sectional observational studyn=9,991 participantsCh5Ch10

In a cross-sectional observational study in the UK Biobank, a high overall level of self-reported physical activity (PA) was associated with a modestly higher intraocular pressure (IOP) of +0.08 mmHg (P = 0.01) among 94,206 participants, but this association was not replicated in the accelerometry data from 27,777 participants.

EpidemiologyCross-sectionalCross-sectional observational studyn=94,206 and 27,777 participantsCh3Ch10

In a cross-sectional observational study with gene-environment interaction analyses and Mendelian randomization (MR) experiments in the UK Biobank, no associations between physical activity (PA) and glaucoma-related outcomes were modified by a glaucoma polygenic risk score (PRS), and MR analyses did not support a causal relationship between PA and any glaucoma-related outcome.

MechanismCross-sectionalCross-sectional observational and gene-environment interaction analyses, Two-sample MRn=UK Biobank participantsCh9Ch10

Is this article assigned to the wrong chapter(s)? Let us know.