Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Bias in two-sample Mendelian randomization when using heritable covariable-adjusted summary associations

Fernando Pires Hartwig, Kate Tilling, George Davey Smith, Deborah A Lawlor, Maria Carolina Borges
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/816363
Fernando Pires Hartwig
1Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
2Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: fernandophartwig@gmail.com fh15144@bristol.ac.uk
Kate Tilling
2Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
3Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
George Davey Smith
2Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
3Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Deborah A Lawlor
2Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
3Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria Carolina Borges
2Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
3Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) allows the use of freely accessible summary association results from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to estimate causal effects of modifiable exposures on outcomes. Some GWAS adjust for heritable covariables in an attempt to estimate direct effects of genetic variants on the trait of interest. One, both or neither of the exposure GWAS and outcome GWAS may have been adjusted for covariables.

Methods We performed a simulation study comprising different scenarios that could motivate covariable adjustment in a GWAS and analysed real data to assess the influence of using covariable-adjusted summary association results in two-sample MR.

Results In the absence of residual confounding between exposure and covariable, between exposure and outcome, and between covariable and outcome, using covariable-adjusted summary associations for two-sample MR eliminated bias due to horizontal pleiotropy. However, covariable adjustment led to bias in the presence of residual confounding (especially between the covariable and the outcome), even in the absence of horizontal pleiotropy (when the genetic variants would be valid instruments without covariable adjustment). In an analysis using real data from the Genetic Investigation of ANthropometric Traits (GIANT) consortium and UK Biobank, the causal effect estimate of waist circumference on blood pressure changed direction upon adjustment of waist circumference for body mass index.

Conclusions Our findings indicate that using covariable-adjusted summary associations in MR should generally be avoided. When that is not possible, careful consideration of the causal relationships underlying the data (including potentially unmeasured confounders) is required to direct sensitivity analyses and interpret results with appropriate caution.

Key messages

  • Summary genetic associations from large genome-wide associations studies (GWAS) have been increasingly used in two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses.

  • Many GWAS adjust for heritable covariates in an attempt to estimate direct genetic effects on the trait of interest.

  • In an extensive simulation study, we demonstrate that using covariable-adjusted summary associations may bias MR analyses.

  • The bias largely depends on the underlying causal structure, specially the presence of unmeasured common causes between the covariable and the outcome.

  • Our findings indicate that using covariable-adjusted summary associations in MR should generally be avoided.

Competing Interest Statement

No competing interests: FPH, KT, GDS, MCB. Competing interests: DAL has received funding from several national and international government and charitable organisations, Roche Diagnostics and Medtronic for research unrelated to that presented in this paper.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 30, 2020.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Bias in two-sample Mendelian randomization when using heritable covariable-adjusted summary associations
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Bias in two-sample Mendelian randomization when using heritable covariable-adjusted summary associations
Fernando Pires Hartwig, Kate Tilling, George Davey Smith, Deborah A Lawlor, Maria Carolina Borges
bioRxiv 816363; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/816363
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Bias in two-sample Mendelian randomization when using heritable covariable-adjusted summary associations
Fernando Pires Hartwig, Kate Tilling, George Davey Smith, Deborah A Lawlor, Maria Carolina Borges
bioRxiv 816363; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/816363

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Genetics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (3513)
  • Biochemistry (7359)
  • Bioengineering (5338)
  • Bioinformatics (20306)
  • Biophysics (10034)
  • Cancer Biology (7763)
  • Cell Biology (11333)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (6444)
  • Ecology (9968)
  • Epidemiology (2065)
  • Evolutionary Biology (13346)
  • Genetics (9366)
  • Genomics (12598)
  • Immunology (7719)
  • Microbiology (19060)
  • Molecular Biology (7452)
  • Neuroscience (41108)
  • Paleontology (300)
  • Pathology (1233)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2141)
  • Physiology (3171)
  • Plant Biology (6869)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1275)
  • Synthetic Biology (1899)
  • Systems Biology (5320)
  • Zoology (1090)