Literature DB >> 15887296

Meta-analysis of genetic studies using Mendelian randomization--a multivariate approach.

John R Thompson1, Cosetta Minelli, Keith R Abrams, Martin D Tobin, Richard D Riley.   

Abstract

In traditional epidemiological studies the association between phenotype (risk factor) and disease is often biased by confounding and reverse causation. As a person's genotype is assigned by a seemingly random process, genes are potentially useful instrumental variables for adjusting for such bias. This type of adjustment combines information on the genotype-disease association and the genotype-phenotype association to estimate the phenotype-disease association and has become known as Mendelian randomization. The information on genotype-disease and genotype-phenotype may well come from a meta-analysis. In such a synthesis, a multivariate approach needs to be used whenever some studies provide evidence on both the genotype-phenotype and genotype-disease associations. This paper presents two multivariate meta-analytical models, which differ in their treatment of the heterogeneities (between-study variances). Heterogeneities on the genotype-phenotype and genotype-disease associations may be highly correlated, but a multivariate model that parameterizes the heterogeneity directly is difficult to fit because that correlation is poorly estimated. We advocate an alternative model that treats the heterogeneities on genotype-phenotype and phenotype-disease as being independent. This model fits readily and implicitly defines the correlation between the heterogeneities on genotype-phenotype and genotype-disease. We show how either maximum likelihood or a Bayesian approach with vague prior distributions can be used to fit the alternative model. Copyright 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15887296     DOI: 10.1002/sim.2100

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  36 in total

Review 1.  Adding Mendelian randomization to a meta-analysis-a burgeoning opportunity.

Authors:  Wenquan Niu; Mingliang Gu
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-12-22

Review 2.  Methodological challenges in mendelian randomization.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen; Marilyn Cornelis; Peter Kraft
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Bayesian methods for instrumental variable analysis with genetic instruments ('Mendelian randomization'): example with urate transporter SLC2A9 as an instrumental variable for effect of urate levels on metabolic syndrome.

Authors:  Paul M McKeigue; Harry Campbell; Sarah Wild; Veronique Vitart; Caroline Hayward; Igor Rudan; Alan F Wright; James F Wilson
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-25       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Genetically Increased Telomere Length and Aging-Related Traits in the U.K. Biobank.

Authors:  Kathryn Demanelis; Lin Tong; Brandon L Pierce
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 6.053

5.  Pancreatic beta-cell function and type 2 diabetes risk: quantify the causal effect using a Mendelian randomization approach based on meta-analyses.

Authors:  Yiqing Song; Edwina Yeung; Aiyi Liu; Tyler J Vanderweele; Liwei Chen; Chen Lu; Chunling Liu; Enrique F Schisterman; Yi Ning; Cuilin Zhang
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2012-08-29       Impact factor: 6.150

6.  Mendelian Randomization and mediation analysis of leukocyte telomere length and risk of lung and head and neck cancers.

Authors:  Linda Kachuri; Olli Saarela; Stig Egil Bojesen; George Davey Smith; Geoffrey Liu; Maria Teresa Landi; Neil E Caporaso; David C Christiani; Mattias Johansson; Salvatore Panico; Kim Overvad; Antonia Trichopoulou; Paolo Vineis; Ghislaine Scelo; David Zaridze; Xifeng Wu; Demetrius Albanes; Brenda Diergaarde; Pagona Lagiou; Gary J Macfarlane; Melinda C Aldrich; Adonina Tardón; Gad Rennert; Andrew F Olshan; Mark C Weissler; Chu Chen; Gary E Goodman; Jennifer A Doherty; Andrew R Ness; Heike Bickeböller; H-Erich Wichmann; Angela Risch; John K Field; M Dawn Teare; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Erik H F M van der Heijden; June C Carroll; Aage Haugen; Shanbeh Zienolddiny; Vidar Skaug; Victor Wünsch-Filho; Eloiza H Tajara; Raquel Ayoub Moysés; Fabio Daumas Nunes; Stephen Lam; Jose Eluf-Neto; Martin Lacko; Wilbert H M Peters; Loïc Le Marchand; Eric J Duell; Angeline S Andrew; Silvia Franceschi; Matthew B Schabath; Jonas Manjer; Susanne Arnold; Philip Lazarus; Anush Mukeriya; Beata Swiatkowska; Vladimir Janout; Ivana Holcatova; Jelena Stojsic; Dana Mates; Jolanta Lissowska; Stefania Boccia; Corina Lesseur; Xuchen Zong; James D McKay; Paul Brennan; Christopher I Amos; Rayjean J Hung
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 7.  Usefulness of Mendelian randomization in observational epidemiology.

Authors:  Murielle Bochud; Valentin Rousson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 8.  Use of pathway information in molecular epidemiology.

Authors:  Duncan C Thomas; David V Conti; James Baurley; Frederik Nijhout; Michael Reed; Cornelia M Ulrich
Journal:  Hum Genomics       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.639

9.  Generating a robust statistical causal structure over 13 cardiovascular disease risk factors using genomics data.

Authors:  Azam Yazdani; Akram Yazdani; Ahmad Samiei; Eric Boerwinkle
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 6.317

10.  Evidence on the causal link between homocysteine and hypertension from a meta-analysis of 40 173 individuals implementing Mendelian randomization.

Authors:  Liwan Fu; Ya-Nan Li; Dongmei Luo; Shufang Deng; Baihui Wu; Yue-Qing Hu
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.