Statistical methods for cis-Mendelian randomization with two-sample summary-level data.

Statistical methods for cis-Mendelian randomization with two-sample summary-level data.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1002/gepi.22506
复制
发表时间:
2023-03
影响因子:
2.1
通讯作者:
Newcombe PJ
Newcombe PJ
中科院分区:
医学4区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Gkatzionis A;Burgess S;Newcombe PJ

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

孟德尔随机化(MR)是使用遗传变异来评估风险因素和关注结果之间因果关系的存在。在这里,我们专注于双样本汇总数据MR分析,其中包含来自单个基因区域的许多相关变体,特别是使用蛋白质表达作为风险因素的顺式MR研究。这些研究必须依赖于来自研究区域的一小部分精心策划的变异;使用该区域的所有变异需要反演病态遗传相关矩阵,并导致数值上不稳定的因果效应估计。我们回顾了cis-MR中的变量选择和估计方法,包括逐步修剪和条件分析,主成分分析,因子分析和贝叶斯变量选择。在模拟研究中,我们表明,各种方法在大样本量和强大的遗传工具的分析中具有可比的性能。然而,当弱仪器偏差被怀疑,因子分析和贝叶斯变量选择产生更可靠的推理比简单的修剪方法,这是经常在实践中使用。最后,我们检查了两个案例研究,分别使用HMGCR和SHBG基因区域的变体评估低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和血清睾酮对冠心病风险的影响。
Mendelian randomization (MR) is the use of genetic variants to assess the existence of a causal relationship between a risk factor and an outcome of interest. Here, we focus on two‐sample summary‐data MR analyses with many correlated variants from a single gene region, particularly on cis‐MR studies which use protein expression as a risk factor. Such studies must rely on a small, curated set of variants from the studied region; using all variants in the region requires inverting an ill‐conditioned genetic correlation matrix and results in numerically unstable causal effect estimates. We review methods for variable selection and estimation in cis‐MR with summary‐level data, ranging from stepwise pruning and conditional analysis to principal components analysis, factor analysis, and Bayesian variable selection. In a simulation study, we show that the various methods have comparable performance in analyses with large sample sizes and strong genetic instruments. However, when weak instrument bias is suspected, factor analysis and Bayesian variable selection produce more reliable inferences than simple pruning approaches, which are often used in practice. We conclude by examining two case studies, assessing the effects of low‐density lipoprotein‐cholesterol and serum testosterone on coronary heart disease risk using variants in the HMGCR and SHBG gene regions, respectively.
DOI: 10.1097/ede.0000000000000559
发表时间: 2017-01
期刊: Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)
影响因子: --
作者:
Burgess S;Bowden J;Fall T;Ingelsson E;Thompson SG
通讯作者: Thompson SG
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyr036
发表时间: 2011-06-01
影响因子: 7.7
作者:
Burgess, Stephen;Thompson, Simon G.
通讯作者: Thompson, Simon G.
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-03621-1
发表时间: 2018-05-08
影响因子: 16.6
作者:
Barbeira AN;Dickinson SP;Bonazzola R;Zheng J;Wheeler HE;Torres JM;Torstenson ES;Shah KP;Garcia T;Edwards TL;Stahl EA;Huckins LM;GTEx Consortium;Nicolae DL;Cox NJ;Im HK
通讯作者: Im HK
DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1604304
发表时间: 2016-12-01
影响因子: 158.5
作者:
Ference, Brian A.;Robinson, Jennifer G.;Sabatine, Marc S.
通讯作者: Sabatine, Marc S.
DOI: 10.1038/ng.3506
发表时间: 2016-03-01
期刊: NATURE GENETICS
影响因子: 30.8
作者:
Gusev, Alexander;Ko, Arthur;Pasaniuc, Bogdan
通讯作者: Pasaniuc, Bogdan