Bayesian methods for meta‐analysis of causal relationships estimated using genetic instrumental variables

Genetic markers can be used as instrumental variables, in an analogous way to randomization in a clinical trial, to estimate the causal relationship between a phenotype and an outcome variable. Our purpose is to extend the existing methods for such Mendelian randomization studies to the context of multiple genetic markers measured in multiple studies, based on the analysis of individual participant data. First, for a single genetic marker in one study, we show that the usual ratio of coefficients approach can be reformulated as a regression with heterogeneous error in the explanatory variable. This can be implemented using a Bayesian approach, which is next extended to include multiple genetic markers. We then propose a hierarchical model for undertaking a meta-analysis of multiple studies, in which it is not necessary that the same genetic markers are measured in each study. This provides an overall estimate of the causal relationship between the phenotype and the outcome, and an assessment of its heterogeneity across studies. As an example, we estimate the causal relationship of blood concentrations of C-reactive protein on fibrinogen levels using data from 11 studies. These methods provide a flexible framework for efficient estimation of causal relationships derived from multiple studies. Issues discussed include weak instrument bias, analysis of binary outcome data such as disease risk, missing genetic data, and the use of haplotypes.

[1]  Tom R. Gaunt,et al.  C-reactive protein and its role in metabolic syndrome: mendelian randomisation study , 2005, The Lancet.

[2]  M. Tobin,et al.  Meta‐analysis of Mendelian randomization studies incorporating all three genotypes , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  Stephen G. Donald,et al.  Testing Identifiability and Specification in Instrumental Variable Models , 1993, Econometric Theory.

[4]  Keith R Abrams,et al.  An integrated approach to the meta-analysis of genetic association studies using Mendelian randomization. , 2004, American journal of epidemiology.

[5]  S. Ebrahim,et al.  Mendelian randomization: prospects, potentials, and limitations. , 2004, International journal of epidemiology.

[6]  George Davey Smith,et al.  Mendelian randomization: Using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  Shah Ebrahim,et al.  Association of C-Reactive Protein With Blood Pressure and Hypertension: Life Course Confounding and Mendelian Randomization Tests of Causality , 2005, Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology.

[8]  S. Lewis,et al.  Meta-analysis of MTHFR 677C→ T polymorphism and coronary heart disease: does totality of evidence support causal role for homocysteine and preventive potential of folate? , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  E. Rimm,et al.  C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Gene Polymorphisms, CRP Levels, and Risk of Incident Coronary Heart Disease in Two Nested Case-Control Studies , 2008, PloS one.

[10]  J. Danesh,et al.  C-reactive protein concentration and risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and mortality: an individual participant meta-analysis , 2010, The Lancet.

[11]  Jack Bowden,et al.  Collaborative pooled analysis of data on C-reactive protein gene variants and coronary disease: judging causality by Mendelian randomisation , 2008 .

[12]  Eric Zivot,et al.  Bayesian and Classical Approaches to Instrumental Variables Regression , 2003 .

[13]  D. Rivers,et al.  Limited Information Estimators and Exogeneity Tests for Simultaneous Probit Models , 1988 .

[14]  Stijn Vansteelandt,et al.  Causal inference with generalized structural mean models , 2003 .

[15]  Paul Scheet,et al.  A fast and flexible statistical model for large-scale population genotype data: applications to inferring missing genotypes and haplotypic phase. , 2006, American journal of human genetics.

[16]  A. Nichols Weak Instruments: An Overview and New Techniques , 2006 .

[17]  R. Kronmal,et al.  The Cardiovascular Health Study: design and rationale. , 1991, Annals of epidemiology.

[18]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Is Mendelian randomization ‘lost in translation?’: Comments on ‘Mendelian randomization equals instrumental variable analysis with genetic instruments’ by Wehby et al. , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[19]  C. Nelson,et al.  The Distribution of the Instrumental Variables Estimator and its T-Ratiowhen the Instrument is a Poor One , 1988 .

[20]  N. Sheehan,et al.  Mendelian randomization as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference , 2007, Statistical methods in medical research.

[21]  Christopher F. Baum,et al.  Instrumental Variables and GMM: Estimation and Testing , 2003 .

[22]  M. Tobin,et al.  Adjusting for bias and unmeasured confounding in Mendelian randomization studies with binary responses. , 2008, International journal of epidemiology.

[23]  Meena Kumari,et al.  Does High C-reactive Protein Concentration Increase Atherosclerosis? The Whitehall II Study , 2008, PloS one.

[24]  Tom R. Gaunt,et al.  The Association of C-Reactive Protein and CRP Genotype with Coronary Heart Disease: Findings from Five Studies with 4,610 Cases amongst 18,637 Participants , 2008, PloS one.

[25]  Marshall Joffe,et al.  Causal logistic models for non‐compliance under randomized treatment with univariate binary response , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  Peter E. Rossi,et al.  A Non-Parametric Bayesian Approach to the Instrumental Variable Problem , 2006 .

[27]  Sarah Parish,et al.  Fibrinogen and coronary heart disease: test of causality by 'Mendelian randomization'. , 2006, International journal of epidemiology.

[28]  J. Sargan THE ESTIMATION OF ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIPS USING INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES , 1958 .

[29]  Paul R. Rosenbaum,et al.  Robust, accurate confidence intervals with a weak instrument: quarter of birth and education , 2005 .

[30]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Meta‐analysis of genetic studies using Mendelian randomization—a multivariate approach , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[31]  S. Ebrahim,et al.  'Mendelian randomization': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? , 2003, International journal of epidemiology.

[32]  A. Wald The Fitting of Straight Lines if Both Variables are Subject to Error , 1940 .

[33]  Frank Windmeijer,et al.  Instrumental Variable Estimators for Binary Outcomes , 2009 .

[34]  E. C. Fieller SOME PROBLEMS IN INTERVAL ESTIMATION , 1954 .

[35]  J. Pearl,et al.  Confounding and Collapsibility in Causal Inference , 1999 .

[36]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit , 2002 .

[37]  Brian P. Poi,et al.  Tests and Confidence Sets with Correct Size when Instruments are Potentially Weak , 2006 .

[38]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Re: Estimation of bias in nongenetic observational studies using "Mendelian triangulation" by Bautista et al. , 2007, Annals of epidemiology.

[39]  Jonathan H. Wright,et al.  A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments , 2002 .

[40]  Andrew Thomas,et al.  WinBUGS - A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility , 2000, Stat. Comput..