Literature DB >> 33393617

A comprehensive evaluation of methods for Mendelian randomization using realistic simulations and an analysis of 38 biomarkers for risk of type 2 diabetes.

Guanghao Qi1, Nilanjan Chatterjee1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have often evaluated methods for Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis based on simulations that do not adequately reflect the data-generating mechanisms in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and there are often discrepancies in the performance of MR methods in simulations and real data sets.
METHODS: We use a simulation framework that generates data on full GWAS for two traits under a realistic model for effect-size distribution coherent with the heritability, co-heritability and polygenicity typically observed for complex traits. We further use recent data generated from GWAS of 38 biomarkers in the UK Biobank and performed down sampling to investigate trends in estimates of causal effects of these biomarkers on the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D).
RESULTS: Simulation studies show that weighted mode and MRMix are the only two methods that maintain the correct type I error rate in a diverse set of scenarios. Between the two methods, MRMix tends to be more powerful for larger GWAS whereas the opposite is true for smaller sample sizes. Among the other methods, random-effect IVW (inverse-variance weighted method), MR-Robust and MR-RAPS (robust adjust profile score) tend to perform best in maintaining a low mean-squared error when the InSIDE assumption is satisfied, but can produce large bias when InSIDE is violated. In real-data analysis, some biomarkers showed major heterogeneity in estimates of their causal effects on the risk of T2D across the different methods and estimates from many methods trended in one direction with increasing sample size with patterns similar to those observed in simulation studies.
CONCLUSION: The relative performance of different MR methods depends heavily on the sample sizes of the underlying GWAS, the proportion of valid instruments and the validity of the InSIDE assumption. Down-sampling analysis can be used in large GWAS for the possible detection of bias in the MR methods.
© The Author(s) 2021; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mendelian randomization; biomarkers; comprehensive evaluation; robust methods; simulation studies; type 2 diabetes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33393617      PMCID: PMC8562333          DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyaa262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  29 in total

1.  Powerful three-sample genome-wide design and robust statistical inference in summary-data Mendelian randomization.

Authors:  Qingyuan Zhao; Yang Chen; Jingshu Wang; Dylan S Small
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Estimation of complex effect-size distributions using summary-level statistics from genome-wide association studies across 32 complex traits.

Authors:  Yan Zhang; Guanghao Qi; Ju-Hyun Park; Nilanjan Chatterjee
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 38.330

3.  Fine-mapping type 2 diabetes loci to single-variant resolution using high-density imputation and islet-specific epigenome maps.

Authors:  Anubha Mahajan; Daniel Taliun; Matthias Thurner; Neil R Robertson; Jason M Torres; N William Rayner; Anthony J Payne; Valgerdur Steinthorsdottir; Robert A Scott; Niels Grarup; James P Cook; Ellen M Schmidt; Matthias Wuttke; Chloé Sarnowski; Reedik Mägi; Jana Nano; Christian Gieger; Stella Trompet; Cécile Lecoeur; Michael H Preuss; Bram Peter Prins; Xiuqing Guo; Lawrence F Bielak; Jennifer E Below; Donald W Bowden; John Campbell Chambers; Young Jin Kim; Maggie C Y Ng; Lauren E Petty; Xueling Sim; Weihua Zhang; Amanda J Bennett; Jette Bork-Jensen; Chad M Brummett; Mickaël Canouil; Kai-Uwe Ec Kardt; Krista Fischer; Sharon L R Kardia; Florian Kronenberg; Kristi Läll; Ching-Ti Liu; Adam E Locke; Jian'an Luan; Ioanna Ntalla; Vibe Nylander; Sebastian Schönherr; Claudia Schurmann; Loïc Yengo; Erwin P Bottinger; Ivan Brandslund; Cramer Christensen; George Dedoussis; Jose C Florez; Ian Ford; Oscar H Franco; Timothy M Frayling; Vilmantas Giedraitis; Sophie Hackinger; Andrew T Hattersley; Christian Herder; M Arfan Ikram; Martin Ingelsson; Marit E Jørgensen; Torben Jørgensen; Jennifer Kriebel; Johanna Kuusisto; Symen Ligthart; Cecilia M Lindgren; Allan Linneberg; Valeriya Lyssenko; Vasiliki Mamakou; Thomas Meitinger; Karen L Mohlke; Andrew D Morris; Girish Nadkarni; James S Pankow; Annette Peters; Naveed Sattar; Alena Stančáková; Konstantin Strauch; Kent D Taylor; Barbara Thorand; Gudmar Thorleifsson; Unnur Thorsteinsdottir; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Daniel R Witte; Josée Dupuis; Patricia A Peyser; Eleftheria Zeggini; Ruth J F Loos; Philippe Froguel; Erik Ingelsson; Lars Lind; Leif Groop; Markku Laakso; Francis S Collins; J Wouter Jukema; Colin N A Palmer; Harald Grallert; Andres Metspalu; Abbas Dehghan; Anna Köttgen; Goncalo R Abecasis; James B Meigs; Jerome I Rotter; Jonathan Marchini; Oluf Pedersen; Torben Hansen; Claudia Langenberg; Nicholas J Wareham; Kari Stefansson; Anna L Gloyn; Andrew P Morris; Michael Boehnke; Mark I McCarthy
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 38.330

Review 4.  10 Years of GWAS Discovery: Biology, Function, and Translation.

Authors:  Peter M Visscher; Naomi R Wray; Qian Zhang; Pamela Sklar; Mark I McCarthy; Matthew A Brown; Jian Yang
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data.

Authors:  Stephen Burgess; Adam Butterworth; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 2.135

Review 6.  Mendelian randomization: genetic anchors for causal inference in epidemiological studies.

Authors:  George Davey Smith; Gibran Hemani
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2014-07-04       Impact factor: 6.150

7.  A framework for the investigation of pleiotropy in two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization.

Authors:  Jack Bowden; Fabiola Del Greco M; Cosetta Minelli; George Davey Smith; Nuala Sheehan; John Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Mendelian randomization analysis using mixture models for robust and efficient estimation of causal effects.

Authors:  Guanghao Qi; Nilanjan Chatterjee
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Consistent Estimation in Mendelian Randomization with Some Invalid Instruments Using a Weighted Median Estimator.

Authors:  Jack Bowden; George Davey Smith; Philip C Haycock; Stephen Burgess
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 2.135

10.  Large-scale genome-wide enrichment analyses identify new trait-associated genes and pathways across 31 human phenotypes.

Authors:  Xiang Zhu; Matthew Stephens
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  4 in total

1.  A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study supports causal effects of kidney function on blood pressure.

Authors:  Zhi Yu; Josef Coresh; Guanghao Qi; Morgan Grams; Eric Boerwinkle; Harold Snieder; Alexander Teumer; Cristian Pattaro; Anna Köttgen; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Adrienne Tin
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2020-05-23       Impact factor: 10.612

2.  Welch-weighted Egger regression reduces false positives due to correlated pleiotropy in Mendelian randomization.

Authors:  Brielin C Brown; David A Knowles
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 11.043

3.  Selection into shift work is influenced by educational attainment and body mass index: a Mendelian randomization study in the UK Biobank.

Authors:  Iyas Daghlas; Rebecca C Richmond; Jacqueline M Lane; Hassan S Dashti; Hanna M Ollila; Eva S Schernhammer; George Davey Smith; Martin K Rutter; Richa Saxena; Céline Vetter
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Likelihood-based Mendelian randomization analysis with automated instrument selection and horizontal pleiotropic modeling.

Authors:  Zhongshang Yuan; Lu Liu; Ping Guo; Ran Yan; Fuzhong Xue; Xiang Zhou
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 14.136

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.