Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data
- PMID: 24114802
- PMCID: PMC4377079
- DOI: 10.1002/gepi.21758
Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies, which typically report regression coefficients summarizing the associations of many genetic variants with various traits, are potentially a powerful source of data for Mendelian randomization investigations. We demonstrate how such coefficients from multiple variants can be combined in a Mendelian randomization analysis to estimate the causal effect of a risk factor on an outcome. The bias and efficiency of estimates based on summarized data are compared to those based on individual-level data in simulation studies. We investigate the impact of gene-gene interactions, linkage disequilibrium, and 'weak instruments' on these estimates. Both an inverse-variance weighted average of variant-specific associations and a likelihood-based approach for summarized data give similar estimates and precision to the two-stage least squares method for individual-level data, even when there are gene-gene interactions. However, these summarized data methods overstate precision when variants are in linkage disequilibrium. If the P-value in a linear regression of the risk factor for each variant is less than 1×10⁻⁵, then weak instrument bias will be small. We use these methods to estimate the causal association of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on coronary artery disease using published data on five genetic variants. A 30% reduction in LDL-C is estimated to reduce coronary artery disease risk by 67% (95% CI: 54% to 76%). We conclude that Mendelian randomization investigations using summarized data from uncorrelated variants are similarly efficient to those using individual-level data, although the necessary assumptions cannot be so fully assessed.
Keywords: Mendelian randomization; causal inference; genome-wide association study; instrumental variables; weak instruments.
© 2013 WILEY PERIODICALS, INC.
Figures

References
-
- Angrist J, Pischke J. In Chapter 4: Instrumental Variables in Action: Sometimes You Get What You Need. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2009.
-
- Baum C, Schaffer M, Stillman S. Instrumental variables and GMM: estimation and testing. Stata J. 2003;3:1–31.
-
- Burgess S, Butterworth A, Malarstig A, Thompson S. Use of Mendelian randomisation to assess potential benefit of clinical intervention. Br Med J. 2012;345:e7325. - PubMed
-
- Burgess S, Seaman S, Lawlor D, Casas J, Thompson S. Missing data methods in Mendelian randomization studies with multiple instruments. Am J Epidemiol. 2011a;174:1069–1076. - PubMed
-
- Burgess S. Thompson S. Bias in causal estimates from Mendelian randomization studies with weak instruments. Stat Med. 2011;30:1312–1323. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Molecular Biology Databases