Dataset Information

The use of two-sample methods for Mendelian randomization analyses on single large datasets.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With genome-wide association data for many exposures and outcomes now available from large biobanks, one-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) is increasingly used to investigate causal relationships. Many robust MR methods are available to address pleiotropy, but these assume independence between the gene-exposure and gene-outcome association estimates. Unlike in two-sample MR, in one-sample MR the two estimates are obtained from the same individuals, and the assumption of independence does not hold in the presence of confounding.

Methods

With simulations mimicking a typical study in UK Biobank, we assessed the performance, in terms of bias and precision of the MR estimate, of the fixed-effect and (multiplicative) random-effects meta-analysis method, weighted median estimator, weighted mode estimator and MR-Egger regression, used in both one-sample and two-sample data. We considered scenarios differing by the: presence/absence of a true causal effect; amount of confounding; and presence and type of pleiotropy (none, balanced or directional).

Results

Even in the presence of substantial correlation due to confounding, all two-sample methods used in one-sample MR performed similarly to when used in two-sample MR, except for MR-Egger which resulted in bias reflecting direction and magnitude of the confounding. Such bias was much reduced in the presence of very high variability in instrument strength across variants (IGX2 of 97%).

Conclusions

Two-sample MR methods can be safely used for one-sample MR performed within large biobanks, expect for MR-Egger. MR-Egger is not recommended for one-sample MR unless the correlation between the gene-exposure and gene-outcome estimates due to confounding can be kept low, or the variability in instrument strength is very high.

SUBMITTER: Minelli C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8580269 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe use of cannabis has increased globally due to more regions decriminalizing marijuana use for therapeutic and recreational aims. Several observational studies have revealed that cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular pathologies and diseases. Nevertheless, the causal associations between cannabis use and cardiovascular diseases remain unclear. Hence, we performed single-variable and multivariable Mendelian randomization (MR) to evaluate the association between cannabis use disorder and various cardiovascular diseases.Materials and methodsSummary statistics were collected from the largest-to-date genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of cannabis use disorder. The 12 SNPs for cannabis use disorder were used as instrumental variables in this study. MR estimates were pooled using a random-effects inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method. Simple median and weighted median methods were conducted as sensitivity analyses.ResultsThe genetic liability to cannabis use disorder was associated with an augmented risk of coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and stroke. Except for stroke, the results were inconsistent in the sensitivity analyses. The overall patterns for the associations of cannabis use disorder with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, pulmonary embolism and stroke remained in multivariable MR analyses adjusting for potential mediators, including smoking, alcohol, body mass index, blood lipid, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and depression. However, the association with coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and deep venous thrombosis did not persist in multivariable MR analyses. Mediation analysis demonstrated that smoking, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein, hypertension, and depression have more significant mediation effects, which suggests that these factors partly mediate the link from cannabis use disorder to coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and deep venous thrombosis.ConclusionThe genetic liability to cannabis use disorder was associated with a higher risk of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and stroke. The evidence for the association between cannabis use disorder, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and deep venous thrombosis was weak. Hence, future use of cannabis for therapeutic and recreational aims should consider its potential impact on cardiovascular diseases.

Project description:Nonrandom selection in one-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR) results in biased estimates and inflated type I error rates only when the selection effects are sufficiently large. In two-sample MR, the different selection mechanisms in two samples may more seriously affect the causal effect estimation. Firstly, we propose sufficient conditions for causal effect invariance under different selection mechanisms using two-sample MR methods. In the simulation study, we consider 49 possible selection mechanisms in two-sample MR, which depend on genetic variants (G), exposures (X), outcomes (Y) and their combination. We further compare eight pleiotropy-robust methods under different selection mechanisms. Results of simulation reveal that nonrandom selection in sample II has a larger influence on biases and type I error rates than those in sample I. Furthermore, selections depending on X+Y, G+Y, or G+X+Y in sample II lead to larger biases than other selection mechanisms. Notably, when selection depends on Y, bias of causal estimation for non-zero causal effect is larger than that for null causal effect. Especially, the mode based estimate has the largest standard errors among the eight methods. In the absence of pleiotropy, selections depending on Y or G in sample II show nearly unbiased causal effect estimations when the casual effect is null. In the scenarios of balanced pleiotropy, all eight MR methods, especially MR-Egger, demonstrate large biases because the nonrandom selections result in the violation of the Instrument Strength Independent of Direct Effect (InSIDE) assumption. When directional pleiotropy exists, nonrandom selections have a severe impact on the eight MR methods. Application demonstrates that the nonrandom selection in sample II (coronary heart disease patients) can magnify the causal effect estimation of obesity on HbA1c levels. In conclusion, nonrandom selection in two-sample MR exacerbates the bias of causal effect estimation for pleiotropy-robust MR methods.