ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2026
Body Mass Index and Facial Aging: Mendelian Randomization and Exploratory Target Prioritization.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Facial aging reflects genetic, metabolic, and environmental influences. Although obesity has been associated with older perceived facial age, the shared genetic basis and direction of the BMI-facial aging relationship remain uncertain. Objective: To evaluate genetic correlations between facial aging and 15 metabolic traits, assess bidirectional associations by Mendelian randomization (MR), and conduct exploratory locus, gene, and compound prioritization. Methods: Public genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics were analyzed using linkage disequilibrium score regression (LDSC) and bidirectional MR with inverse-variance weighted (IVW), weighted median, MR-Egger, and MR-PRESSO methods. Because BMI showed the most consistent signal, related loci were evaluated by fine-mapping, colocalization, ANNOVAR, MAGMA, and GCTA-fastBAT. DGIdb screening and molecular docking were used for hypothesis generation. Results: BMI showed the strongest genetic correlation with facial aging (rg = 0.215; FDR-adjusted P = 3.94×10 Limitations: The facial-aging phenotype was perception-based, the GWAS datasets were predominantly of European ancestry and may have partially overlapping samples, and all downstream analyses were computational. Conclusion: Higher BMI may contribute to perceived facial aging, but these findings do not show that BMI reduction or any candidate compound improves facial aging. Metabolic health is the more clinically actionable implication, whereas the prioritized genes and compounds remain exploratory and require functional validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.