Otherindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-EGG-115 standard review

Genetic study: TMAO may be a marker, not a cause, of heart disease

Assessment of Causal Direction Between Gut Microbiota-Dependent Metabolites and Cardiometabolic Health: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Analysis.

Overview

Jia J et al.. Diabetes 2019 · PMID 31167879 · DOI 10.2337/db19-0153

Genetically higher TMAO was not linked to heart attack or stroke; kidney disease raised TMAO.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Test the causal direction between TMAO and disease.

How was the study done?

Mendelian randomization.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

GWAS consortia.

What was actually found?

No causal effect of TMAO on CVD; diseases raise TMAO.

How large was the observed effect?

Not significant for CVD outcomes.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

High TMAO may reflect kidney or metabolic disease rather than cause heart attacks.

What are the study's limitations?

MR assumptions.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Undermines the causal chain.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Moderate.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

It cannot fully exclude a small causal effect.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Jia J et al.
Journal
Diabetes
Year
2019
Identifier
PMID 31167879 DOI 10.2337/db19-0153
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

not stated in abstract

2. Research question

Are TMAO and its precursors causally related to cardiometabolic diseases, or the reverse?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Other – Bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization
Population

GWAS summary data (European-ancestry consortia; details not in abstract)

Country

International consortia

Period

not stated in abstract

Sample size

Not stated in abstract

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

not detailed in abstract

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Genetically predicted TMAO, carnitine, choline, betaine

Comparator

Per unit genetic change

Endpoints

T2DM, CAD, MI, stroke, AF, CKD

Statistical methods

MR with Bonferroni correction

5. Actual results

Results

Genetically predicted higher TMAO and carnitine were not associated with T2DM, AF, CAD, MI, stroke or CKD after Bonferroni correction. T2DM (0.130 +/- 0.036) and CKD (0.483 +/- 0.168) were causally associated with higher TMAO.

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

T2DM and kidney disease increase TMAO levels; observational evidence for cardiovascular diseases may be due to confounding or reverse causality.

6. Strengths

  • Genetic instruments reduce confounding
  • Bidirectional design

7. Weaknesses

  • Weak instruments for metabolites possible
  • Power for some outcomes unclear

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

MR assumptions (pleiotropy, instrument strength) not fully verifiable from abstract.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Null MR for CVD plus positive reverse-direction MR supports TMAO as a marker rather than cause.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Weakens the causal step 'TMAO causes cardiovascular events' on which the archive's argument depends.

11. Independent contrary findings

Animal data show proatherogenic effects of TMAO.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Mostly European-ancestry data.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Important limiting evidence on causality.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsmoderate
Directnessindirect
Reproducibilityunknown
Consistency with the overall evidenceunknown
Regional transferabilitymoderate
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Larger MR with stronger instruments.

15. Linked fact checks