Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31369124›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2020

Factorial Mendelian randomization: using genetic variants to assess interactions.

Jessica M B Rees, Christopher N Foley, Stephen Burgess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jessica M B ReesCardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Christopher N FoleyMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Stephen BurgessCardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/14/59/31282Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/7Wellcome Trust 204623/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFactorial Mendelian randomization is the use of genetic variants to answer questions about interactions. Although the approach has been used in applied investigations, little methodological advice is available on how to design or perform a factorial Mendelian randomization analysis. Previous analyses have employed a 2 × 2 approach, using dichotomized genetic scores to divide the population into four subgroups as in a factorial randomized trial.

methodsWe describe two distinct contexts for factorial Mendelian randomization: investigating interactions between risk factors, and investigating interactions between pharmacological interventions on risk factors. We propose two-stage least squares methods using all available genetic variants and their interactions as instrumental variables, and using continuous genetic scores as instrumental variables rather than dichotomized scores. We illustrate our methods using data from UK Biobank to investigate the interaction between body mass index and alcohol consumption on systolic blood pressure.

resultsSimulated and real data show that efficiency is maximized using the full set of interactions between genetic variants as instruments. In the applied example, between 4- and 10-fold improvement in efficiency is demonstrated over the 2 × 2 approach. Analyses using continuous genetic scores are more efficient than those using dichotomized scores. Efficiency is improved by finding genetic variants that divide the population at a natural break in the distribution of the risk factor, or else divide the population into more equal-sized groups.

conclusionsPrevious factorial Mendelian randomization analyses may have been underpowered. Efficiency can be improved by using all genetic variants and their interactions as instrumental variables, rather than the 2 × 2 approach.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationMendelian Randomization AnalysisCausalityHumansLeast-Squares AnalysisRisk Factorscausal inferencefactorial randomized trialinstrumental variablesinteractionMendelian randomization

Identifiers

PMID31369124
PMCPMC7750987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.