Literature DB >> 31651042

Approximation of bias and mean-squared error in two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses.

Lu Deng1, Han Zhang1, Lei Song1, Kai Yu1.   

Abstract

Mendelian randomization (MR) is a type of instrumental variable (IV) analysis that uses genetic variants as IVs for a risk factor to study its causal effect on an outcome. Extensive investigations on the performance of IV analysis procedures, such as the one based on the two-stage least squares (2SLS) procedure, have been conducted under the one-sample scenario, where measures on IVs, the risk factor, and the outcome are assumed to be available for each study participant. Recent MR analysis usually is performed with data from two independent or partially overlapping genetic association studies (two-sample setting), with one providing information on the association between the IVs and the outcome, and the other on the association between the IVs and the risk factor. We investigate the performance of 2SLS in the two-sample-based MR when the IVs are weakly associated with the risk factor. We derive closed form formulas for the bias and mean squared error of the 2SLS estimate and verify them with numeric simulations under realistic circumstances. Using these analytic formulas, we can study the pros and cons of conducting MR analysis under one-sample and two-sample settings and assess the impact of having overlapping samples. We also propose and validate a bias-corrected estimator for the causal effect. © Published 2019. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mendelian randomization; bias; instrumental variable; mean squared error; two-stage least squares estimate

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31651042      PMCID: PMC7182476          DOI: 10.1111/biom.13169

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   1.701


  18 in total

1.  'Mendelian randomization': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease?

Authors:  George Davey Smith; Shah Ebrahim
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Bias-reduced estimators and confidence intervals for odds ratios in genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Hua Zhong; Ross L Prentice
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2008-02-28       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Flexible design for following up positive findings.

Authors:  Kai Yu; Nilanjan Chatterjee; William Wheeler; Qizhai Li; Sophia Wang; Nathaniel Rothman; Sholom Wacholder
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Instrumental variable estimation of the causal effect of plasma 25-hydroxy-vitamin D on colorectal cancer risk: a mendelian randomization analysis.

Authors:  Evropi Theodoratou; Tom Palmer; Lina Zgaga; Susan M Farrington; Paul McKeigue; Farhat V N Din; Albert Tenesa; George Davey-Smith; Malcolm G Dunlop; Harry Campbell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  PhenoScanner: a database of human genotype-phenotype associations.

Authors:  James R Staley; James Blackshaw; Mihir A Kamat; Steve Ellis; Praveen Surendran; Benjamin B Sun; Dirk S Paul; Daniel Freitag; Stephen Burgess; John Danesh; Robin Young; Adam S Butterworth
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  The MR-Base platform supports systematic causal inference across the human phenome.

Authors:  Gibran Hemani; Jie Zheng; Benjamin Elsworth; Tom R Gaunt; Philip C Haycock; Kaitlin H Wade; Valeriia Haberland; Denis Baird; Charles Laurin; Stephen Burgess; Jack Bowden; Ryan Langdon; Vanessa Y Tan; James Yarmolinsky; Hashem A Shihab; Nicholas J Timpson; David M Evans; Caroline Relton; Richard M Martin; George Davey Smith
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 8.140

7.  Investigating genetic correlations and causal effects between caffeine consumption and sleep behaviours.

Authors:  Jorien L Treur; Mark Gibson; Amy E Taylor; Peter J Rogers; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  J Sleep Res       Date:  2018-04-22       Impact factor: 3.981

8.  Mendelian randomization provides support for obesity as a risk factor for meningioma.

Authors:  Hannah Takahashi; Alex J Cornish; Amit Sud; Philip J Law; Linden Disney-Hogg; Lisa Calvocoressi; Lingeng Lu; Helen M Hansen; Ivan Smirnov; Kyle M Walsh; Johannes Schramm; Per Hoffmann; Markus M Nöthen; Karl-Heinz Jöckel; Joellen M Schildkraut; Matthias Simon; Melissa Bondy; Margaret Wrensch; Joseph L Wiemels; Elizabeth B Claus; Clare Turnbull; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  An examination of multivariable Mendelian randomization in the single-sample and two-sample summary data settings.

Authors:  Eleanor Sanderson; George Davey Smith; Frank Windmeijer; Jack Bowden
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Reading Mendelian randomisation studies: a guide, glossary, and checklist for clinicians.

Authors:  Neil M Davies; Michael V Holmes; George Davey Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-07-12
View more
  1 in total

1.  Power calculation for the general two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis.

Authors:  Lu Deng; Han Zhang; Kai Yu
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 2.344

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.