Detecting and correcting for bias in Mendelian randomization analyses using Gene-by-Environment interactions

International Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2019, Pages 702-707

  Spiller, Wes ^a   Slichter, David ^b   Bowden, Jack ^a   Davey Smith, George ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

gene environment interaction; invalid instruments; Mendelian randomization; MRGxE; pleiotropy

Indexed keywords

BLOOD; BODY MASS; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOTYPE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; MAGNITUDE; PLEIOTROPY; SAMPLING BIAS;

ARTICLE; BODY MASS; DIRECTED ACYCLIC GRAPH; GENOTYPE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; HUMAN; MENDELIAN RANDOMIZATION ANALYSIS; OBESITY; PLEIOTROPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL BIAS; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; BIOBANK; BLOOD PRESSURE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS;

UNITED KINGDOM;

ADIPOSITY; BIAS; BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; BLOOD PRESSURE; BODY MASS INDEX; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; GENETIC PLEIOTROPY; HUMANS; MENDELIAN RANDOMIZATION ANALYSIS; OBESITY;

EID: 85072058502     PISSN: 03005771     EISSN: 14643685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyy204     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S. 'Mendelian randomization': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? Int J Epidemiol 2003;32:1-22.
2. Davey Smith G, Hemani G. Mendelian randomization: genetic anchors for causal inference in epidemiological studies. Hum Mol Genet 2014;23:R89-98.
3. Burgess S, Small DS, Thompson SG. A review of instrumental variable estimators for Mendelian randomization. Stat Methods Med Res 2017;26:2333-55.
4. Hemani G, Bowden J, Davey Smith G. Evaluating the potential role of pleiotropy in Mendelian randomization studies. Hum Mol Genet 2018;27:R195-208.
5. Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Burgess S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int J Epidemiol 2015;44:512-25.
6. Burgess S, Thompson SG. Multivariable Mendelian randomization: the use of pleiotropic genetic variants to estimate causal effects. Am J Epidemiol 2015;181:251-60.
7. Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Haycock PC, Burgess S. Consistent estimation in Mendelian randomization with some invalid instruments using a weighted median estimator. Genet Epidemiol 2016;40:304-14.
8. Hartwig FP, Davey Smith G, Bowden J. Robust inference in summary data Mendelian randomization via the zero modal pleiotropy assumption. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:1985-98.
9. Slichter D. Testing Instrument Validity and Identification with Invalid Instruments. Rochester: University of Rochester, 2014.
10. Imbens GW, Angrist JD. Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects. Econometrica 1994;62:467-75.
11. Card D. Using Geographic Variation in College Proximity to Estimate the Return to Schooling. Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, 1993.
12. Conley TG, Hansen CB, Rossi PE. Plausibly exogenous. Rev Econ Stat 2012;94:260-72.
13. Small DS. Mediation analysis without sequential ignorability: using baseline covariates interacted with random assignment as instrumental variables. J Stat Res 2012;46:91-103.
14. Cho Y, Shin SY, Won S, Relton CL, Davey Smith G, Shin MJ. Alcohol intake and cardiovascular risk factors: A Mendelian randomisation study. Sci Rep 2015;5:18422.
15. Emdin CA, Khera AV, Natarajan P et al. Genetic association of waist-to-hip ratio with cardiometabolic traits, type 2 diabetes, and coronary heart disease. JAMA 2017;317:626-34.
16. Tyrrell J, Wood AR, Ames RM et al. Gene-obesogenic environment interactions in the UK Biobank study. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:559-75.
17. Davey Smith G. Use of genetic markers and gene-diet interactions for interrogating population-level causal influences of diet on health. Genes Nutr 2011;6:27-43.
18. Lewis SJ, Davey Smith G. Alcohol, ALDH2, and esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis which illustrates the potentials and limitations of a Mendelian randomization approach. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:1967-71.
19. Chen L, Davey Smith G, Harbord RM, Lewis SJ. Alcohol intake and blood pressure: a systematic review implementing a Mendelian randomization approach. Plos Med 2008;5: e52-71.
20. Davey Smith G. Mendelian randomization for strengthening causal inference in observational studies: application to gene x environment interactions. Perspect Psychol Sci 2010;5: 527-45.
21. van Kippersluis H, Rietveld CA. Pleiotropy-robust Mendelian randomization. Int J Epidemiol 2017;47:1279-88.
22. Locke AE, Kahali B, Berndt SI et al. Genetic studies of body mass index yield new insights for obesity biology. Nature 2015;518: 197-206.
23. Taylor AE, Lu F, Carslake D et al. Exploring causal associations of alcohol with cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in a Chinese population using Mendelian randomization analysis. Sci Rep 2015;5:14005.
24. Wald A. The fitting of straight lines if both variables are subject to error. Ann Math Stat 1940;11:284-300.
25. Droyvold WB, Midthjell K, Nilsen TI, Holmen J. Change in body mass index and its impact on blood pressure: a prospective population study. Int J Obes (Lond) 2005;29:650-55.
26. Neter JE, Stam BE, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM. Influence of weight reduction on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hypertension 2003;42:878-84.
27. Li LJ, Liao J, Cheung CY et al. Assessing the causality between blood pressure and retinal vascular caliber through Mendelian randomisation. Sci Rep 2016;6:22031.
28. Timpson NJ, Harbord R, Davey Smith G, Zacho J, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Does greater adiposity increase blood pressure and hypertension risk? Mendelian randomization using the FTO/MC4R genotype. Hypertension 2009;54:84-90.
29. Holmes MV, Lange LA, Palmer T et al. Causal effects of body mass index on cardiometabolic traits and events: a Mendelian randomization analysis. Am J Hum Genet 2014;94:198-208.
30. Spiller W, Davies NM, Palmer TM. Software application profile: mrrobust-A tool for performing two-sample summary Mendelian randomization analyses. Int J Epidemiol 201948: 684-90.
31. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP, 2015.
32. Hartwig FP, Davey Smith G, Bowden J. Robust inference in summary data Mendelian randomization via the zero modal pleiotropy assumption. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:1985-98.
33. Rask-Andersen M, Karlsson T, Ek WE, JohanssonA . Gene-environment interaction study for BMI reveals interactions between genetic factors and physical activity, alcohol consumption and socioeconomic status. PLOS Genet 2017;13:e1006977.
34. Mackenbach JP. Health and deprivation-inequality and the North. In: Townsend P, Phillimore P, Beattie A (eds). Health Policy, Vol. 10. London: Routledge, 1988, p. 207.
35. VanderWeele TJ, Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ, Cornelis M, Kraft P. Methodological challenges in Mendelian randomization. Epidemiology 2014;25:427-35.
36. Robinson MR, English G, Moser G et al. Genotype-covariate interaction effects and the heritability of adult body mass index. Nat Genet 2017;49:1174-81.
37. Krishna A, Razak F, Lebel A, Davey Smith G, Subramanian SV. Trends in group inequalities and interindividual inequalities in BMI in the United States, 1993-2012. Am J Clin Nutr 2015;101: 598-605.
38. Munafo MR, Davey Smith G. Robust research needs many lines of evidence. Nature 2018;553:399-401.
39. Lawlor DA, Tilling K, Davey Smith G. Triangulation in aetiological epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol 2016;45:1866-86.