Cargando…

Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures

A key assumption in Mendelian randomisation is that the relationship between the genetic instruments and the outcome is fully mediated by the exposure, known as the exclusion restriction assumption. However, in epidemiological studies, the exposure is often a coarsened approximation to some latent c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tudball, Matthew J., Bowden, Jack, Hughes, Rachael A., Ly, Amanda, Munafò, Marcus R., Tilling, Kate, Zhao, Qingyuan, Davey Smith, George
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33527565
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gepi.22376
_version_ 1784601862769475584
author Tudball, Matthew J.
Bowden, Jack
Hughes, Rachael A.
Ly, Amanda
Munafò, Marcus R.
Tilling, Kate
Zhao, Qingyuan
Davey Smith, George
author_facet Tudball, Matthew J.
Bowden, Jack
Hughes, Rachael A.
Ly, Amanda
Munafò, Marcus R.
Tilling, Kate
Zhao, Qingyuan
Davey Smith, George
author_sort Tudball, Matthew J.
collection PubMed
description A key assumption in Mendelian randomisation is that the relationship between the genetic instruments and the outcome is fully mediated by the exposure, known as the exclusion restriction assumption. However, in epidemiological studies, the exposure is often a coarsened approximation to some latent continuous trait. For example, latent liability to schizophrenia can be thought of as underlying the binary diagnosis measure. Genetically driven variation in the outcome can exist within categories of the exposure measurement, thus violating this assumption. We propose a framework to clarify this violation, deriving a simple expression for the resulting bias and showing that it may inflate or deflate effect estimates but will not reverse their sign. We then characterise a set of assumptions and a straight‐forward method for estimating the effect of SD increases in the latent exposure. Our method relies on a sensitivity parameter which can be interpreted as the genetic variance of the latent exposure. We show that this method can be applied in both the one‐sample and two‐sample settings. We conclude by demonstrating our method in an applied example and reanalysing two papers which are likely to suffer from this type of bias, allowing meaningful interpretation of their effect sizes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8603937
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86039372021-11-26 Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures Tudball, Matthew J. Bowden, Jack Hughes, Rachael A. Ly, Amanda Munafò, Marcus R. Tilling, Kate Zhao, Qingyuan Davey Smith, George Genet Epidemiol Research Articles A key assumption in Mendelian randomisation is that the relationship between the genetic instruments and the outcome is fully mediated by the exposure, known as the exclusion restriction assumption. However, in epidemiological studies, the exposure is often a coarsened approximation to some latent continuous trait. For example, latent liability to schizophrenia can be thought of as underlying the binary diagnosis measure. Genetically driven variation in the outcome can exist within categories of the exposure measurement, thus violating this assumption. We propose a framework to clarify this violation, deriving a simple expression for the resulting bias and showing that it may inflate or deflate effect estimates but will not reverse their sign. We then characterise a set of assumptions and a straight‐forward method for estimating the effect of SD increases in the latent exposure. Our method relies on a sensitivity parameter which can be interpreted as the genetic variance of the latent exposure. We show that this method can be applied in both the one‐sample and two‐sample settings. We conclude by demonstrating our method in an applied example and reanalysing two papers which are likely to suffer from this type of bias, allowing meaningful interpretation of their effect sizes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-01 2021-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8603937/ /pubmed/33527565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gepi.22376 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Genetic Epidemiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Tudball, Matthew J.
Bowden, Jack
Hughes, Rachael A.
Ly, Amanda
Munafò, Marcus R.
Tilling, Kate
Zhao, Qingyuan
Davey Smith, George
Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title_full Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title_fullStr Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title_full_unstemmed Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title_short Mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
title_sort mendelian randomisation with coarsened exposures
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33527565
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gepi.22376
work_keys_str_mv AT tudballmatthewj mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT bowdenjack mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT hughesrachaela mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT lyamanda mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT munafomarcusr mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT tillingkate mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT zhaoqingyuan mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures
AT daveysmithgeorge mendelianrandomisationwithcoarsenedexposures