Estimating the health impact of nicotine exposure by dissecting the effects of nicotine versus non-nicotine constituents of tobacco smoke: A multivariable Mendelian randomisation study.

The detrimental health effects of smoking are well-known, but the impact of regular nicotine use without exposure to the other constituents of tobacco is less clear. Given the increasing daily use of alternative nicotine delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes, it is increasingly important to understand and separate the effects of nicotine use from the impact of tobacco smoke exposure. Using a multivariable Mendelian randomisation framework, we explored the direct effects of nicotine compared with the non-nicotine constituents of tobacco smoke on health outcomes (lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV-1], forced vital capacity [FVC], coronary heart disease [CHD], and heart rate [HR]). We used Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) summary statistics from Buchwald and colleagues, the GWAS and Sequencing Consortium of Alcohol and Nicotine, the International Lung Cancer Consortium, and UK Biobank. Increased nicotine metabolism increased the risk of COPD, lung cancer, and lung function in the univariable analysis. However, when accounting for smoking heaviness in the multivariable analysis, we found that increased nicotine metabolite ratio (indicative of decreased nicotine exposure per cigarette smoked) decreases heart rate (b = -0.30, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.10) and lung function (b = -33.33, 95% CI -41.76 to -24.90). There was no clear evidence of an effect on the remaining outcomes. The results suggest that these smoking-related outcomes are not due to nicotine exposure but are caused by the other components of tobacco smoke; however, there are multiple potential sources of bias, and the results should be triangulated using evidence from a range of methodologies.

Exploring pleiotropy in Mendelian randomisation analyses: What are genetic variants associated with 'cigarette smoking initiation' really capturing?

Genetic variants used as instruments for exposures in Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses may have horizontal pleiotropic effects (i.e., influence outcomes via pathways other than through the exposure), which can undermine the validity of results. We examined the extent of this using smoking behaviours as an example. We first ran a phenome-wide association study in UK Biobank, using a smoking initiation genetic instrument. From the most strongly associated phenotypes, we selected those we considered could either plausibly or not plausibly be caused by smoking. We examined associations between genetic instruments for smoking initiation, smoking heaviness and lifetime smoking and these phenotypes in UK Biobank and the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). We conducted negative control analyses among never smokers, including children. We found evidence that smoking-related genetic instruments were associated with phenotypes not plausibly caused by smoking in UK Biobank and (to a lesser extent) ALSPAC. We observed associations with phenotypes among never smokers. Our results demonstrate that smoking-related genetic risk scores are associated with unexpected phenotypes that are less plausibly downstream of smoking. This may reflect horizontal pleiotropy in these genetic risk scores, and we would encourage researchers to exercise caution this when using these and genetic risk scores for other complex behavioural exposures. We outline approaches that could be taken to consider this and overcome issues caused by potential horizontal pleiotropy, for example, in genetically informed causal inference analyses (e.g., MR) it is important to consider negative control outcomes and triangulation approaches, to avoid arriving at incorrect conclusions.

Harnessing tissue-specific genetic variation to dissect putative causal pathways between body mass index and cardiometabolic phenotypes.

Body mass index (BMI) is a complex disease risk factor known to be influenced by genes acting via both metabolic pathways and appetite regulation. In this study, we aimed to gain insight into the phenotypic consequences of BMI-associated genetic variants, which may be mediated by their expression in different tissues. First, we harnessed meta-analyzed gene expression datasets derived from subcutaneous adipose (n = 1257) and brain (n = 1194) tissue to identify 86 and 140 loci, respectively, which provided evidence of genetic colocalization with BMI. These two sets of tissue-partitioned loci had differential effects with respect to waist-to-hip ratio, suggesting that the way they influence fat distribution might vary despite their having very similar average magnitudes of effect on BMI itself (adipose = 0.0148 and brain = 0.0149 standard deviation change in BMI per effect allele). For instance, BMI-associated variants colocalized with TBX15 expression in adipose tissue (posterior probability [PPA] = 0.97), but not when we used TBX15 expression data derived from brain tissue (PPA = 0.04) This gene putatively influences BMI via its role in skeletal development. Conversely, there were loci where BMI-associated variants provided evidence of colocalization with gene expression in brain tissue (e.g., NEGR1, PPA = 0.93), but not when we used data derived from adipose tissue, suggesting that these genes might be more likely to influence BMI via energy balance. Leveraging these tissue-partitioned variant sets through a multivariable Mendelian randomization framework provided strong evidence that the brain-tissue-derived variants are predominantly responsible for driving the genetically predicted effects of BMI on cardiovascular-disease endpoints (e.g., coronary artery disease: odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.04-1.07, p = 4.67 × 10-14). In contrast, our analyses suggested that the adipose tissue variants might predominantly be responsible for the underlying relationship between BMI and measures of cardiac function, such as left ventricular stroke volume (beta = 0.21, 95% confidence interval = 0.09-0.32, p = 6.43 × 10-4).

Estimation of causal effects of a time-varying exposure at multiple time points through multivariable mendelian randomization.

Mendelian Randomisation (MR) is a powerful tool in epidemiology that can be used to estimate the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome in the presence of unobserved confounding, by utilising genetic variants as instrumental variables (IVs) for the exposure. The effect estimates obtained from MR studies are often interpreted as the lifetime effect of the exposure in question. However, the causal effects of some exposures are thought to vary throughout an individual's lifetime with periods during which an exposure has a greater effect on a particular outcome. Multivariable MR (MVMR) is an extension of MR that allows for multiple, potentially highly related, exposures to be included in an MR estimation. MVMR estimates the direct effect of each exposure on the outcome conditional on all the other exposures included in the estimation. We explore the use of MVMR to estimate the direct effect of a single exposure at different time points in an individual's lifetime on an outcome. We use simulations to illustrate the interpretation of the results from such analyses and the key assumptions required. We show that causal effects at different time periods can be estimated through MVMR when the association between the genetic variants used as instruments and the exposure measured at those time periods varies. However, this estimation will not necessarily identify exact time periods over which an exposure has the most effect on the outcome. Prior knowledge regarding the biological basis of exposure trajectories can help interpretation. We illustrate the method through estimation of the causal effects of childhood and adult BMI on C-Reactive protein and smoking behaviour.

Investigating causality in the association between DNA methylation and type 2 diabetes using bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomisation.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Several studies have identified associations between type 2 diabetes and DNA methylation (DNAm). However, the causal role of these associations remains unclear. This study aimed to provide evidence for a causal relationship between DNAm and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We used bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomisation (2SMR) to evaluate causality at 58 CpG sites previously detected in a meta-analysis of epigenome-wide association studies (meta-EWAS) of prevalent type 2 diabetes in European populations. We retrieved genetic proxies for type 2 diabetes and DNAm from the largest genome-wide association study (GWAS) available. We also used data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC, UK) when associations of interest were not available in the larger datasets. We identified 62 independent SNPs as proxies for type 2 diabetes, and 39 methylation quantitative trait loci as proxies for 30 of the 58 type 2 diabetes-related CpGs. We applied the Bonferroni correction for multiple testing and inferred causality based on p<0.001 for the type 2 diabetes to DNAm direction and p<0.002 for the opposing DNAm to type 2 diabetes direction in the 2SMR analysis. RESULTS: We found strong evidence of a causal effect of DNAm at cg25536676 (DHCR24) on type 2 diabetes. An increase in transformed residuals of DNAm at this site was associated with a 43% (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.15, 1.78, p=0.001) higher risk of type 2 diabetes. We inferred a likely causal direction for the remaining CpG sites assessed. In silico analyses showed that the CpGs analysed were enriched for expression quantitative trait methylation sites (eQTMs) and for specific traits, dependent on the direction of causality predicted by the 2SMR analysis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: We identified one CpG mapping to a gene related to the metabolism of lipids (DHCR24) as a novel causal biomarker for risk of type 2 diabetes. CpGs within the same gene region have previously been associated with type 2 diabetes-related traits in observational studies (BMI, waist circumference, HDL-cholesterol, insulin) and in Mendelian randomisation analyses (LDL-cholesterol). Thus, we hypothesise that our candidate CpG in DHCR24 may be a causal mediator of the association between known modifiable risk factors and type 2 diabetes. Formal causal mediation analysis should be implemented to further validate this assumption.

Separating the effects of early and later life adiposity on colorectal cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have linked childhood obesity with elevated risk of colorectal cancer; however, it is unclear if this association is causal or independent from the effects of obesity in adulthood on colorectal cancer risk. METHODS: We conducted Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses to investigate potential causal relationships between self-perceived body size (thinner, plumper, or about average) in early life (age 10) and measured body mass index in adulthood (mean age 56.5) with risk of colorectal cancer. The total and independent effects of body size exposures were estimated using univariable and multivariable MR, respectively. Summary data were obtained from a genome-wide association study of 453,169 participants in UK Biobank for body size and from a genome-wide association study meta-analysis of three colorectal cancer consortia of 125,478 participants. RESULTS: Genetically predicted early life body size was estimated to increase odds of colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR] per category change: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.27), with stronger results for colon cancer (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.00-1.35), and distal colon cancer (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.04-1.51). After accounting for adult body size using multivariable MR, effect estimates for early life body size were attenuated towards the null for colorectal cancer (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.77-1.22) and colon cancer (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.76-1.25), while the estimate for distal colon cancer was of similar magnitude but more imprecise (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.90-1.77). Genetically predicted adult life body size was estimated to increase odds of colorectal (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.57), colon (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.67), and proximal colon (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the positive association between early life body size and colorectal cancer risk is likely due to large body size retainment into adulthood.

Methodological approaches, challenges, and opportunities in the application of Mendelian randomisation to lifecourse epidemiology: A systematic literature review.

Diseases diagnosed in adulthood may have antecedents throughout (including prenatal) life. Gaining a better understanding of how exposures at different stages in the lifecourse influence health outcomes is key to elucidating the potential benefits of disease prevention strategies. Mendelian randomisation (MR) is increasingly used to estimate causal effects of exposures across the lifecourse on later life outcomes. This systematic literature review explores MR methods used to perform lifecourse investigations and reviews previous work that has utilised MR to elucidate the effects of factors acting at different stages of the lifecourse. We conducted searches in PubMed, Embase, Medline and MedRXiv databases. Thirteen methodological studies were identified. Four studies focused on the impact of time-varying exposures in the interpretation of "standard" MR techniques, five presented methods for repeat measures of the same exposure, and four described methodological approaches to handling multigenerational exposures. A further 127 studies presented the results of an applied research question. Over half of these estimated effects in a single generation and were largely confined to the exploration of questions regarding body composition. The remaining mostly estimated maternal effects. There is a growing body of research focused on the development and application of MR methods to address lifecourse research questions. The underlying assumptions require careful consideration and the interpretation of results rely on select conditions. Whilst we do not advocate for a particular strategy, we encourage practitioners to make informed decisions on how to approach a research question in this field with a solid understanding of the limitations present and how these may be affected by the research question, modelling approach, instrument selection, and data availability.

Associations between insomnia and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: Evidence from mendelian randomization and multivariable regression analyses.

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is common and associated with adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in observational studies. However, those associations could be vulnerable to residual confounding or reverse causality. Our aim was to estimate the association of insomnia with stillbirth, miscarriage, gestational diabetes (GD), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), perinatal depression, preterm birth (PTB), and low/high offspring birthweight (LBW/HBW). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used 2-sample mendelian randomization (MR) with 81 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) instrumenting for a lifelong predisposition to insomnia. Our outcomes included ever experiencing stillbirth, ever experiencing miscarriage, GD, HDP, perinatal depression, PTB (gestational age <37 completed weeks), LBW (<2,500 grams), and HBW (>4,500 grams). We used data from women of European descent (N = 356,069, mean ages at delivery 25.5 to 30.0 years) from UK Biobank (UKB), FinnGen, Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), Born in Bradford (BiB), and the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort (MoBa). Main MR analyses used inverse variance weighting (IVW), with weighted median and MR-Egger as sensitivity analyses. We compared MR estimates with multivariable regression of insomnia in pregnancy on outcomes in ALSPAC (N = 11,745). IVW showed evidence of an association of genetic susceptibility to insomnia with miscarriage (odds ratio (OR): 1.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18, 2.17, p = 0.002), perinatal depression (OR 3.56, 95% CI: 1.49, 8.54, p = 0.004), and LBW (OR 3.17, 95% CI: 1.69, 5.96, p < 0.001). IVW results did not support associations of insomnia with stillbirth, GD, HDP, PTB, and HBW, with wide CIs including the null. Associations of genetic susceptibility to insomnia with miscarriage, perinatal depression, and LBW were not observed in weighted median or MR-Egger analyses. Results from these sensitivity analyses were directionally consistent with IVW results for all outcomes, with the exception of GD, perinatal depression, and PTB in MR-Egger. Multivariable regression showed associations of insomnia at 18 weeks of gestation with perinatal depression (OR 2.96, 95% CI: 2.42, 3.63, p < 0.001), but not with LBW (OR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.24, p = 0.60). Multivariable regression with miscarriage and stillbirth was not possible due to small numbers in index pregnancies. Key limitations are potential horizontal pleiotropy (particularly for perinatal depression) and low statistical power in MR, and residual confounding in multivariable regression. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed some evidence in support of a possible causal relationship between genetically predicted insomnia and miscarriage, perinatal depression, and LBW. Our study also found observational evidence in support of an association between insomnia in pregnancy and perinatal depression, with no clear multivariable evidence of an association with LBW. Our findings highlight the importance of healthy sleep in women of reproductive age, though replication in larger studies, including with genetic instruments specific to insomnia in pregnancy are important.

Investigating causal relations between sleep duration and risks of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: linear and nonlinear Mendelian randomization analyses.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have reported maternal short/long sleep duration to be associated with adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether there are nonlinear causal effects. Our aim was to use Mendelian randomization (MR) and multivariable regression to examine nonlinear effects of sleep duration on stillbirth (MR only), miscarriage (MR only), gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, perinatal depression, preterm birth and low/high offspring birthweight. METHODS: We used data from European women in UK Biobank (N=176,897), FinnGen (N=~123,579), Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (N=6826), Born in Bradford (N=2940) and Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa, N=14,584). We used 78 previously identified genetic variants as instruments for sleep duration and investigated its effects using two-sample, and one-sample nonlinear (UK Biobank only), MR. We compared MR findings with multivariable regression in MoBa (N=76,669), where maternal sleep duration was measured at 30 weeks. RESULTS: In UK Biobank, MR provided evidence of nonlinear effects of sleep duration on stillbirth, perinatal depression and low offspring birthweight. Shorter and longer duration increased stillbirth and low offspring birthweight; shorter duration increased perinatal depression. For example, longer sleep duration was related to lower risk of low offspring birthweight (odds ratio 0.79 per 1 h/day (95% confidence interval: 0.67, 0.93)) in the shortest duration group and higher risk (odds ratio 1.40 (95% confidence interval: 1.06, 1.84)) in the longest duration group, suggesting shorter and longer duration increased the risk. These were supported by the lack of evidence of a linear effect of sleep duration on any outcome using two-sample MR. In multivariable regression, risks of all outcomes were higher in the women reporting <5 and ≥10 h/day sleep compared with the reference category of 8-9 h/day, despite some wide confidence intervals. Nonlinear models fitted the data better than linear models for most outcomes (likelihood ratio P-value=0.02 to 3.2×10-52), except for gestational diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show shorter and longer sleep duration potentially causing higher risks of stillbirth, perinatal depression and low offspring birthweight. Larger studies with more cases are needed to detect potential nonlinear effects on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, preterm birth and high offspring birthweight.

Identifying molecular mediators of the relationship between body mass index and endometrial cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer is the most common gynaecological cancer in high-income countries. Elevated body mass index (BMI) is an established modifiable risk factor for this condition and is estimated to confer a larger effect on endometrial cancer risk than any other cancer site. However, the molecular mechanisms underpinning this association remain unclear. We used Mendelian randomization (MR) to evaluate the causal role of 14 molecular risk factors (hormonal, metabolic and inflammatory markers) in endometrial cancer risk. We then evaluated and quantified the potential mediating role of these molecular traits in the relationship between BMI and endometrial cancer using multivariable MR. METHODS: Genetic instruments to proxy 14 molecular risk factors and BMI were constructed by identifying single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) reliably associated (P < 5.0 × 10-8) with each respective risk factor in previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Summary statistics for the association of these SNPs with overall and subtype-specific endometrial cancer risk (12,906 cases and 108,979 controls) were obtained from a GWAS meta-analysis of the Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium (ECAC), Epidemiology of Endometrial Cancer Consortium (E2C2) and UK Biobank. SNPs were combined into multi-allelic models and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were generated using inverse-variance weighted random-effects models. The mediating roles of the molecular risk factors in the relationship between BMI and endometrial cancer were then estimated using multivariable MR. RESULTS: In MR analyses, there was strong evidence that BMI (OR per standard deviation (SD) increase 1.88, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.09, P = 3.87 × 10-31), total testosterone (OR per inverse-normal transformed nmol/L increase 1.64, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.88, P = 1.71 × 10-12), bioavailable testosterone (OR per natural log transformed nmol/L increase: 1.46, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.65, P = 3.48 × 10-9), fasting insulin (OR per natural log transformed pmol/L increase: 3.93, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.74, P = 7.18 × 10-7) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG, OR per inverse-normal transformed nmol/L increase 0.71, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.85, P = 2.07 × 10-4) had a causal effect on endometrial cancer risk. Additionally, there was suggestive evidence that total serum cholesterol (OR per mg/dL increase 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00, P = 4.01 × 10-2) had an effect on endometrial cancer risk. In mediation analysis, we found evidence for a mediating role of fasting insulin (19% total effect mediated, 95% CI 5 to 34%, P = 9.17 × 10-3), bioavailable testosterone (15% mediated, 95% CI 10 to 20%, P = 1.43 × 10-8) and SHBG (7% mediated, 95% CI 1 to 12%, P = 1.81 × 10-2) in the relationship between BMI and endometrial cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive MR analysis provides insight into potential causal mechanisms linking BMI with endometrial cancer risk and suggests targeting of insulinemic and hormonal traits as a potential strategy for the prevention of endometrial cancer.

Applying Mendelian randomization to appraise causality in relationships between nutrition and cancer.

Dietary factors are assumed to play an important role in cancer risk, apparent in consensus recommendations for cancer prevention that promote nutritional changes. However, the evidence in this field has been generated predominantly through observational studies, which may result in biased effect estimates because of confounding, exposure misclassification, and reverse causality. With major geographical differences and rapid changes in cancer incidence over time, it is crucial to establish which of the observational associations reflect causality and to identify novel risk factors as these may be modified to prevent the onset of cancer and reduce its progression. Mendelian randomization (MR) uses the special properties of germline genetic variation to strengthen causal inference regarding potentially modifiable exposures and disease risk. MR can be implemented through instrumental variable (IV) analysis and, when robustly performed, is generally less prone to confounding, reverse causation and measurement error than conventional observational methods and has different sources of bias (discussed in detail below). It is increasingly used to facilitate causal inference in epidemiology and provides an opportunity to explore the effects of nutritional exposures on cancer incidence and progression in a cost-effective and timely manner. Here, we introduce the concept of MR and discuss its current application in understanding the impact of nutritional factors (e.g., any measure of diet and nutritional intake, circulating biomarkers, patterns, preference or behaviour) on cancer aetiology and, thus, opportunities for MR to contribute to the development of nutritional recommendations and policies for cancer prevention. We provide applied examples of MR studies examining the role of nutritional factors in cancer to illustrate how this method can be used to help prioritise or deprioritise the evaluation of specific nutritional factors as intervention targets in randomised controlled trials. We describe possible biases when using MR, and methodological developments aimed at investigating and potentially overcoming these biases when present. Lastly, we consider the use of MR in identifying causally relevant nutritional risk factors for various cancers in different regions across the world, given notable geographical differences in some cancers. We also discuss how MR results could be translated into further research and policy. We conclude that findings from MR studies, which corroborate those from other well-conducted studies with different and orthogonal biases, are poised to substantially improve our understanding of nutritional influences on cancer. For such corroboration, there is a requirement for an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach to investigate risk factors for cancer incidence and progression.

The impact of education inequality on rheumatoid arthritis risk is mediated by smoking and body mass index: Mendelian randomization study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the causal relationship between educational attainment-as a proxy for socioeconomic inequality-and risk of RA, and quantify the roles of smoking and BMI as potential mediators. METHODS: Using the largest genome-wide association studies (GWAS), we performed a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study of genetically predicted educational attainment (instrumented using 1265 variants from 766 345 individuals) and RA (14 361 cases, 43 923 controls). We used two-step MR to quantify the proportion of education's effect on RA mediated by smoking exposure (as a composite index capturing duration, heaviness and cessation, using 124 variants from 462 690 individuals) and BMI (517 variants, 681 275 individuals), and multivariable MR to estimate proportion mediated by both factors combined. RESULTS: Each s.d. increase in educational attainment (4.2 years of schooling) was protective of RA (odds ratio 0.37; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.44). Higher educational attainment was also protective for smoking exposure (ß = -0.25 s.d.; 95% CI: -0.26, -0.23) and BMI [ß = -0.27 s.d. (∼1.3 kg/m2); 95% CI: -0.31, -0.24]. Smoking mediated 24% (95% CI: 13%, 35%) and BMI 17% (95% CI: 11%, 23%) of the total effect of education on RA. Combined, the two risk factors explained 47% (95% CI: 11%, 82%) of the total effect. CONCLUSION: Higher educational attainment has a protective effect on RA risk. Interventions to reduce smoking and excess adiposity at a population level may reduce this risk, but a large proportion of education's effect on RA remains unexplained. Further research into other risk factors that act as potentially modifiable mediators are required.

Exploring and mitigating potential bias when genetic instrumental variables are associated with multiple non-exposure traits in Mendelian randomization.

With the increasing size and number of genome-wide association studies, individual single nucleotide polymorphisms are increasingly found to associate with multiple traits. Many different mechanisms could result in proposed genetic IVs for an exposure of interest being associated with multiple non-exposure traits, some of which could bias MR results. We describe and illustrate, through causal diagrams, a range of scenarios that could result in proposed IVs being related to non-exposure traits in MR studies. These associations could occur due to five scenarios: (i) confounding, (ii) vertical pleiotropy, (iii) horizontal pleiotropy, (iv) reverse causation and (v) selection bias. For each of these scenarios we outline steps that could be taken to explore the underlying mechanism and mitigate any resulting bias in the MR estimation. We recommend MR studies explore possible IV-non-exposure associations across a wider range of traits than is usually the case. We highlight the pros and cons of relying on sensitivity analyses without considering particular pleiotropic paths versus systematically exploring and controlling for potential pleiotropic or other biasing paths via known traits. We apply our recommendations to an illustrative example of the effect of maternal insomnia on offspring birthweight in UK Biobank.

Lung function and cardiovascular disease: a two-sample Mendelian randomisation study.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies suggest an association between reduced lung function and risk of coronary artery disease and ischaemic stroke, independent of shared cardiovascular risk factors such as cigarette smoking. We use the latest genetic epidemiological methods to determine whether impaired lung function is causally associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Mendelian randomisation uses genetic variants as instrumental variables to investigate causation. Preliminary analysis used two-sample Mendelian randomisation with lung function single nucleotide polymorphisms. To avoid collider bias, the main analysis used single nucleotide polymorphisms for lung function identified from UKBiobank in a multivariable Mendelian randomisation model conditioning for height, body mass index and smoking.Multivariable Mendelian randomisation shows strong evidence that reduced forced vital capacity (FVC) causes increased risk of coronary artery disease (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.46 per standard deviation). Reduced forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) is unlikely to cause increased risk of coronary artery disease, as evidence of its effect becomes weak after conditioning for height (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.30). There is weak evidence that reduced lung function increases risk of ischaemic stroke. CONCLUSION: There is strong evidence that reduced FVC is independently and causally associated with coronary artery disease. Although the mechanism remains unclear, FVC could be taken into consideration when assessing cardiovascular risk and considered a potential target for reducing cardiovascular events. FEV1 and airflow obstruction do not appear to cause increased cardiovascular events; confounding and collider bias may explain previous findings of a causal association.

Risk factors mediating the effect of body mass index and waist-to-hip ratio on cardiovascular outcomes: Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Higher body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, but the extent to which this is mediated by blood pressure, diabetes, lipid traits, and smoking is not fully understood. METHODS: Using consortia and UK Biobank genetic association summary data from 140,595 to 898,130 participants predominantly of European ancestry, Mendelian randomization mediation analysis was performed to investigate the degree to which systolic blood pressure (SBP), diabetes, lipid traits, and smoking mediated an effect of BMI and WHR on the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral artery disease (PAD) and stroke. RESULTS: The odds ratio of CAD per 1-standard deviation increase in genetically predicted BMI was 1.49 (95% CI 1.39 to 1.60). This attenuated to 1.34 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.45) after adjusting for genetically predicted SBP (proportion mediated 27%, 95% CI 3% to 50%), to 1.27 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.37) after adjusting for genetically predicted diabetes (41% mediated, 95% CI 18% to 63%), to 1.47 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.59) after adjusting for genetically predicted lipids (3% mediated, 95% -23% to 29%), and to 1.46 (95% CI 1.34 to 1.58) after adjusting for genetically predicted smoking (6% mediated, 95% CI -20% to 32%). Adjusting for all the mediators together, the estimate attenuated to 1.14 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.26; 66% mediated, 95% CI 42% to 91%). A similar pattern was observed when considering genetically predicted WHR as the exposure, and PAD or stroke as the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Measures to reduce obesity will lower the risk of cardiovascular disease primarily by impacting downstream metabolic risk factors, particularly diabetes and hypertension. Reduction of obesity prevalence alongside control and management of its mediators is likely to be most effective for minimizing the burden of obesity.

Mendelian randomization provides evidence for a causal effect of higher serum IGF-1 concentration on risk of hip and knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: How insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) is related to OA is not well understood. We determined relationships between IGF-1 and hospital-diagnosed hand, hip and knee OA in UK Biobank, using Mendelian randomization (MR) to determine causality. METHODS: Serum IGF-1 was assessed by chemiluminescent immunoassay. OA was determined using Hospital Episode Statistics. One-sample MR (1SMR) was performed using two-stage least-squares regression, with an unweighted IGF-1 genetic risk score as an instrument. Multivariable MR included BMI as an additional exposure (instrumented by BMI genetic risk score). MR analyses were adjusted for sex, genotyping chip and principal components. We then performed two-sample MR (2SMR) using summary statistics from Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genetic Epidemiology (CHARGE) (IGF-1, N = 30 884) and the recent genome-wide association study meta-analysis (N = 455 221) of UK Biobank and Arthritis Research UK OA Genetics (arcOGEN). RESULTS: A total of 332 092 adults in UK Biobank had complete data. Their mean (s.d.) age was 56.5 (8.0) years and 54% were female. IGF-1 was observationally related to a reduced odds of hand OA [odds ratio per doubling = 0.87 (95% CI 0.82, 0.93)], and an increased odds of hip OA [1.04 (1.01, 1.07)], but was unrelated to knee OA [0.99 (0.96, 1.01)]. Using 1SMR, we found strong evidence for an increased risk of hip [odds ratio per s.d. increase = 1.57 (1.21, 2.01)] and knee [1.30 (1.07, 1.58)] OA with increasing IGF-1 concentration. By contrast, we found no evidence for a causal effect of IGF-1 concentration on hand OA [0.98 (0.57, 1.70)]. Results were consistent when estimated using 2SMR and in multivariable MR analyses accounting for BMI. CONCLUSION: We have found evidence that increased serum IGF-1 is causally related to higher risk of hip and knee OA.

Testing and correcting for weak and pleiotropic instruments in two-sample multivariable Mendelian randomization.

Multivariable Mendelian randomization (MVMR) is a form of instrumental variable analysis which estimates the direct effect of multiple exposures on an outcome using genetic variants as instruments. Mendelian randomization and MVMR are frequently conducted using two-sample summary data where the association of the genetic variants with the exposures and outcome are obtained from separate samples. If the genetic variants are only weakly associated with the exposures either individually or conditionally, given the other exposures in the model, then standard inverse variance weighting will yield biased estimates for the effect of each exposure. Here, we develop a two-sample conditional F-statistic to test whether the genetic variants strongly predict each exposure conditional on the other exposures included in a MVMR model. We show formally that this test is equivalent to the individual level data conditional F-statistic, indicating that conventional rule-of-thumb critical values of F> 10, can be used to test for weak instruments. We then demonstrate how reliable estimates of the causal effect of each exposure on the outcome can be obtained in the presence of weak instruments and pleiotropy, by repurposing a commonly used heterogeneity Q-statistic as an estimating equation. Furthermore, the minimized value of this Q-statistic yields an exact test for heterogeneity due to pleiotropy. We illustrate our methods with an application to estimate the causal effect of blood lipid fractions on age-related macular degeneration.

Mendelian randomisation for mediation analysis: current methods and challenges for implementation.

Mediation analysis seeks to explain the pathway(s) through which an exposure affects an outcome. Traditional, non-instrumental variable methods for mediation analysis experience a number of methodological difficulties, including bias due to confounding between an exposure, mediator and outcome and measurement error. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can be used to improve causal inference for mediation analysis. We describe two approaches that can be used for estimating mediation analysis with MR: multivariable MR (MVMR) and two-step MR. We outline the approaches and provide code to demonstrate how they can be used in mediation analysis. We review issues that can affect analyses, including confounding, measurement error, weak instrument bias, interactions between exposures and mediators and analysis of multiple mediators. Description of the methods is supplemented by simulated and real data examples. Although MR relies on large sample sizes and strong assumptions, such as having strong instruments and no horizontally pleiotropic pathways, our simulations demonstrate that these methods are unaffected by confounders of the exposure or mediator and the outcome and non-differential measurement error of the exposure or mediator. Both MVMR and two-step MR can be implemented in both individual-level MR and summary data MR. MR mediation methods require different assumptions to be made, compared with non-instrumental variable mediation methods. Where these assumptions are more plausible, MR can be used to improve causal inference in mediation analysis.

Evaluating the relationship between circulating lipoprotein lipids and apolipoproteins with risk of coronary heart disease: A multivariable Mendelian randomisation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Circulating lipoprotein lipids cause coronary heart disease (CHD). However, the precise way in which one or more lipoprotein lipid-related entities account for this relationship remains unclear. Using genetic instruments for lipoprotein lipid traits implemented through multivariable Mendelian randomisation (MR), we sought to compare their causal roles in the aetiology of CHD. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of circulating non-fasted lipoprotein lipid traits in the UK Biobank (UKBB) for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B to identify lipid-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Using data from CARDIoGRAMplusC4D for CHD (consisting of 60,801 cases and 123,504 controls), we performed univariable and multivariable MR analyses. Similar GWAS and MR analyses were conducted for high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and apolipoprotein A-I. The GWAS of lipids and apolipoproteins in the UKBB included between 393,193 and 441,016 individuals in whom the mean age was 56.9 y (range 39-73 y) and of whom 54.2% were women. The mean (standard deviation) lipid concentrations were LDL cholesterol 3.57 (0.87) mmol/L and HDL cholesterol 1.45 (0.38) mmol/L, and the median triglycerides was 1.50 (IQR = 1.11) mmol/L. The mean (standard deviation) values for apolipoproteins B and A-I were 1.03 (0.24) g/L and 1.54 (0.27) g/L, respectively. The GWAS identified multiple independent SNPs associated at P < 5 × 10-8 for LDL cholesterol (220), apolipoprotein B (n = 255), triglycerides (440), HDL cholesterol (534), and apolipoprotein A-I (440). Between 56%-93% of SNPs identified for each lipid trait had not been previously reported in large-scale GWASs. Almost half (46%) of these SNPs were associated at P < 5 × 10-8 with more than one lipid-related trait. Assessed individually using MR, LDL cholesterol (odds ratio [OR] 1.66 per 1-standard-deviation-higher trait; 95% CI: 1.49-1.86; P < 0.001), triglycerides (OR 1.34; 95% CI: 1.25-1.44; P < 0.001) and apolipoprotein B (OR 1.73; 95% CI: 1.56-1.91; P < 0.001) had effect estimates consistent with a higher risk of CHD. In multivariable MR, only apolipoprotein B (OR 1.92; 95% CI: 1.31-2.81; P < 0.001) retained a robust effect, with the estimate for LDL cholesterol (OR 0.85; 95% CI: 0.57-1.27; P = 0.44) reversing and that of triglycerides (OR 1.12; 95% CI: 1.02-1.23; P = 0.01) becoming weaker. Individual MR analyses showed a 1-standard-deviation-higher HDL cholesterol (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.75-0.86; P < 0.001) and apolipoprotein A-I (OR 0.83; 95% CI: 0.77-0.89; P < 0.001) to lower the risk of CHD, but these effect estimates attenuated substantially to the null on accounting for apolipoprotein B. A limitation is that, owing to the nature of lipoprotein metabolism, measures related to the composition of lipoprotein particles are highly correlated, creating a challenge in making exclusive interpretations on causation of individual components. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that apolipoprotein B is the predominant trait that accounts for the aetiological relationship of lipoprotein lipids with risk of CHD.

Adiposity, metabolites, and colorectal cancer risk: Mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Higher adiposity increases the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), but whether this relationship varies by anatomical sub-site or by sex is unclear. Further, the metabolic alterations mediating the effects of adiposity on CRC are not fully understood. METHODS: We examined sex- and site-specific associations of adiposity with CRC risk and whether adiposity-associated metabolites explain the associations of adiposity with CRC. Genetic variants from genome-wide association studies of body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR, unadjusted for BMI; N = 806,810), and 123 metabolites from targeted nuclear magnetic resonance metabolomics (N = 24,925), were used as instruments. Sex-combined and sex-specific Mendelian randomization (MR) was conducted for BMI and WHR with CRC risk (58,221 cases and 67,694 controls in the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium, Colorectal Cancer Transdisciplinary Study, and Colon Cancer Family Registry). Sex-combined MR was conducted for BMI and WHR with metabolites, for metabolites with CRC, and for BMI and WHR with CRC adjusted for metabolite classes in multivariable models. RESULTS: In sex-specific MR analyses, higher BMI (per 4.2 kg/m2) was associated with 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08, 1.38) times higher CRC odds among men (inverse-variance-weighted (IVW) model); among women, higher BMI (per 5.2 kg/m2) was associated with 1.09 (95% CI = 0.97, 1.22) times higher CRC odds. WHR (per 0.07 higher) was more strongly associated with CRC risk among women (IVW OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.08, 1.43) than men (IVW OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.81, 1.36). BMI or WHR was associated with 104/123 metabolites at false discovery rate-corrected P ≤ 0.05; several metabolites were associated with CRC, but not in directions that were consistent with the mediation of positive adiposity-CRC relations. In multivariable MR analyses, associations of BMI and WHR with CRC were not attenuated following adjustment for representative metabolite classes, e.g., the univariable IVW OR for BMI with CRC was 1.12 (95% CI = 1.00, 1.26), and this became 1.11 (95% CI = 0.99, 1.26) when adjusting for cholesterol in low-density lipoprotein particles. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that higher BMI more greatly raises CRC risk among men, whereas higher WHR more greatly raises CRC risk among women. Adiposity was associated with numerous metabolic alterations, but none of these explained associations between adiposity and CRC. More detailed metabolomic measures are likely needed to clarify the mechanistic pathways.