62
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The MR-Base platform supports systematic causal inference across the human phenome

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Results from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) can be used to infer causal relationships between phenotypes, using a strategy known as 2-sample Mendelian randomization (2SMR) and bypassing the need for individual-level data. However, 2SMR methods are evolving rapidly and GWAS results are often insufficiently curated, undermining efficient implementation of the approach. We therefore developed MR-Base ( http://www.mrbase.org): a platform that integrates a curated database of complete GWAS results (no restrictions according to statistical significance) with an application programming interface, web app and R packages that automate 2SMR. The software includes several sensitivity analyses for assessing the impact of horizontal pleiotropy and other violations of assumptions. The database currently comprises 11 billion single nucleotide polymorphism-trait associations from 1673 GWAS and is updated on a regular basis. Integrating data with software ensures more rigorous application of hypothesis-driven analyses and allows millions of potential causal relationships to be efficiently evaluated in phenome-wide association studies.

          eLife digest

          Our health is affected by many exposures and risk factors, including aspects of our lifestyles, our environments, and our biology. It can, however, be hard to work out the causes of health outcomes because ill-health can influence risk factors and risk factors tend to influence each other. To work out whether particular interventions influence health outcomes, scientists will ideally conduct a so-called randomized controlled trial, where some randomly-chosen participants are given an intervention that modifies the risk factor and others are not. But this type of experiment can be expensive or impractical to conduct.

          Alternatively, scientists can also use genetics to mimic a randomized controlled trial. This technique – known as Mendelian randomization – is possible for two reasons. First, because it is essentially random whether a person has one version of a gene or another. Second, because our genes influence different risk factors. For example, people with one version of a gene might be more likely to drink alcohol than people with another version. Researchers can compare people with different versions of the gene to infer what effect alcohol drinking has on their health.

          Every day, new studies investigate the role of genetic variants in human health, which scientists can draw on for research using Mendelian randomization. But until now, complete results from these studies have not been organized in one place. At the same time, statistical methods for Mendelian randomization are continually being developed and improved. To take advantage of these advances, Hemani, Zheng, Elsworth et al. produced a computer programme and online platform called “MR-Base”, combining up-to-date genetic data with the latest statistical methods.

          MR-Base automates the process of Mendelian randomization, making research much faster: analyses that previously could have taken months can now be done in minutes. It also makes studies more reliable, reducing the risk of human error and ensuring scientists use the latest methods. MR-Base contains over 11 billion associations between people’s genes and health-related outcomes. This will allow researchers to investigate many potential causes of poor health. As new statistical methods and new findings from genetic studies are added to MR-Base, its value to researchers will grow.

          Related collections

          Most cited references87

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          A global reference for human genetic variation

          The 1000 Genomes Project set out to provide a comprehensive description of common human genetic variation by applying whole-genome sequencing to a diverse set of individuals from multiple populations. Here we report completion of the project, having reconstructed the genomes of 2,504 individuals from 26 populations using a combination of low-coverage whole-genome sequencing, deep exome sequencing, and dense microarray genotyping. We characterized a broad spectrum of genetic variation, in total over 88 million variants (84.7 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 3.6 million short insertions/deletions (indels), and 60,000 structural variants), all phased onto high-quality haplotypes. This resource includes >99% of SNP variants with a frequency of >1% for a variety of ancestries. We describe the distribution of genetic variation across the global sample, and discuss the implications for common disease studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression

            Background: The number of Mendelian randomization analyses including large numbers of genetic variants is rapidly increasing. This is due to the proliferation of genome-wide association studies, and the desire to obtain more precise estimates of causal effects. However, some genetic variants may not be valid instrumental variables, in particular due to them having more than one proximal phenotypic correlate (pleiotropy). Methods: We view Mendelian randomization with multiple instruments as a meta-analysis, and show that bias caused by pleiotropy can be regarded as analogous to small study bias. Causal estimates using each instrument can be displayed visually by a funnel plot to assess potential asymmetry. Egger regression, a tool to detect small study bias in meta-analysis, can be adapted to test for bias from pleiotropy, and the slope coefficient from Egger regression provides an estimate of the causal effect. Under the assumption that the association of each genetic variant with the exposure is independent of the pleiotropic effect of the variant (not via the exposure), Egger’s test gives a valid test of the null causal hypothesis and a consistent causal effect estimate even when all the genetic variants are invalid instrumental variables. Results: We illustrate the use of this approach by re-analysing two published Mendelian randomization studies of the causal effect of height on lung function, and the causal effect of blood pressure on coronary artery disease risk. The conservative nature of this approach is illustrated with these examples. Conclusions: An adaption of Egger regression (which we call MR-Egger) can detect some violations of the standard instrumental variable assumptions, and provide an effect estimate which is not subject to these violations. The approach provides a sensitivity analysis for the robustness of the findings from a Mendelian randomization investigation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Consistent Estimation in Mendelian Randomization with Some Invalid Instruments Using a Weighted Median Estimator

              ABSTRACT Developments in genome‐wide association studies and the increasing availability of summary genetic association data have made application of Mendelian randomization relatively straightforward. However, obtaining reliable results from a Mendelian randomization investigation remains problematic, as the conventional inverse‐variance weighted method only gives consistent estimates if all of the genetic variants in the analysis are valid instrumental variables. We present a novel weighted median estimator for combining data on multiple genetic variants into a single causal estimate. This estimator is consistent even when up to 50% of the information comes from invalid instrumental variables. In a simulation analysis, it is shown to have better finite‐sample Type 1 error rates than the inverse‐variance weighted method, and is complementary to the recently proposed MR‐Egger (Mendelian randomization‐Egger) regression method. In analyses of the causal effects of low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol and high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol on coronary artery disease risk, the inverse‐variance weighted method suggests a causal effect of both lipid fractions, whereas the weighted median and MR‐Egger regression methods suggest a null effect of high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol that corresponds with the experimental evidence. Both median‐based and MR‐Egger regression methods should be considered as sensitivity analyses for Mendelian randomization investigations with multiple genetic variants.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Reviewing Editor
                Journal
                eLife
                Elife
                eLife
                eLife
                eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
                2050-084X
                30 May 2018
                2018
                : 7
                : e34408
                Affiliations
                [1 ]deptMedical Research Council (MRC) Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School University of Bristol BristolUnited Kingdom
                [2 ]deptDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care University of Cambridge CambridgeUnited Kingdom
                [3 ]deptUniversity of Queensland Diamantina Institute Translational Research Institute BrisbaneAustralia
                [4]The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai United States
                [5]The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai United States
                Author notes
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                [‡]

                These authors also contributed equally to this work.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0920-1055
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6623-6839
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3362-6280
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4600-6013
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5365-8760
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7938-127X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2052-4840
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7992-7719
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1407-8314
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0924-3247
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5001-3350
                Article
                34408
                10.7554/eLife.34408
                5976434
                29846171
                95c45b8d-0c93-464d-b42d-682b6d24d321
                © 2018, Hemani et al

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 03 January 2018
                : 28 March 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004440, Wellcome;
                Award ID: 208806/Z/17/Z
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000289, Cancer Research UK;
                Award ID: C18281/A19169
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004330, GlaxoSmithKline;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100005614, Biogen;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000265, Medical Research Council;
                Award ID: Methodology Research Fellowship, MR/N501906/1
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Award ID: NIHR Bristol BRC
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004440, Wellcome;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000923, Australian Research Council;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000925, National Health and Medical Research Council;
                Award ID: APP1125200
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000925, National Health and Medical Research Council;
                Award ID: APP1137714
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000289, Cancer Research UK;
                Award ID: Population Research Postdoctoral Fellowship, C52724/A20138
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100009855, Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation;
                Award ID: 2013/18/Relton
                Award Recipient :
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
                Categories
                Tools and Resources
                Computational and Systems Biology
                Human Biology and Medicine
                Custom metadata
                Compiling public datasets into a single, centralised repository and linking directly to analytical software completely transforms the scale and scope of causal inference across the phenome.

                Life sciences
                causal inference,mendelian randomization,gwas,human
                Life sciences
                causal inference, mendelian randomization, gwas, human

                Comments

                Comment on this article