Clustered environments and randomized genes: A fundamental distinction between conventional and genetic epidemiology

被引:411
作者
Smith, George Davey [1 ,2 ]
Lawlor, Debbie A. [1 ,2 ]
Harbord, Roger [1 ]
Timpson, Nic [1 ,2 ]
Day, Ian [1 ,2 ]
Ebrahim, Shah [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, Dept Social Med, Bristol, Avon, England
[2] Univ Bristol, MRC, Ctr Causal Anal Translat Epidemiol, Bristol, Avon, England
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, London WC1, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
D O I
10.1371/journal.pmed.0040352
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background In conventional epidemiology confounding of the exposure of interest with lifestyle or socioeconomic factors, and reverse causation whereby disease status influences exposure rather than vice versa, may invalidate causal interpretations of observed associations. Conversely, genetic variants should not be related to the confounding factors that distort associations in conventional observational epidemiological studies. Furthermore, disease onset will not influence genotype. Therefore, it has been suggested that genetic variants that are known to be associated with a modifiable (nongenetic) risk factor can be used to help determine the causal effect of this modifiable risk factor on disease outcomes. This approach, mendelian randomization, is increasingly being applied within epidemiological studies. However, there is debate about the underlying premise that associations between genotypes and disease outcomes are not confounded by other risk factors. We examined the extent to which genetic variants, on the one hand, and nongenetic environmental exposures or phenotypic characteristics on the other, tend to be associated with each other, to assess the degree of confounding that would exist in conventional epidemiological studies compared with mendelian randomization studies. Methods and Findings We estimated pairwise correlations between nongenetic baseline variables and genetic variables in a cross-sectional study comparing the number of correlations that were statistically significant at the 5%, 1%, and 0.01% level (alpha= 0.05, 0.01, and 0.0001, respectively) with the number expected by chance if all variables were in fact uncorrelated, using a two-sided binomial exact test. We demonstrate that behavioural, socioeconomic, and physiological factors are strongly interrelated, with 45% of all possible pairwise associations between 96 nongenetic characteristics (n=4,560 correlations) being significant at the p, 0.01 level ( the ratio of observed to expected significant associations was 45; p-value for difference between observed and expected < 0.000001). Similar findings were observed for other levels of significance. In contrast, genetic variants showed no greater association with each other, or with the 96 behavioural, socioeconomic, and physiological factors, than would be expected by chance. Conclusions These data illustrate why observational studies have produced misleading claims regarding potentially causal factors for disease. The findings demonstrate the potential power of a methodology that utilizes genetic variants as indicators of exposure level when studying environmentally modifiable risk factors.
引用
收藏
页码:1985 / 1992
页数:8
相关论文
共 49 条
[21]   Alcohol, ALDH2, and esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis which illustrates the potentials and limitations of a Mendelian randomization approach [J].
Lewis, SJ ;
Smith, GD .
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2005, 14 (08) :1967-1971
[22]   Psychological stress and cardiovascular disease: empirical demonstration of bias in a prospective observational study of Scottish men [J].
Macleod, J ;
Smith, GD ;
Heslop, PF ;
Metcalfe, C ;
Carroll, D ;
Hart, C .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 324 (7348) :1247-1251
[23]  
MANSON JE, 1993, CIRCULATION, V88, P1
[24]   Parity, oral contraceptives, and the risk of ovarian cancer among carriers and noncarriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation [J].
Modan, B ;
Hartge, P ;
Hirsh-Yechezkel, G ;
Chetrit, A ;
Lubin, F ;
Beller, U ;
Ben-Baruch, G ;
Fishman, A ;
Menczer, J ;
Struewing, JP ;
Tucker, MA ;
Wacholder, S ;
Ebbers, SM ;
Friedman, E ;
Piura, B .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2001, 345 (04) :235-240
[25]   Limits to causal inference based on mendelian randomization: A comparison with randomized controlled trials [J].
Nitsch, D ;
Molokhia, M ;
Smeeth, L ;
DeStavola, BL ;
Whittaker, JC ;
Leon, DA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 163 (05) :397-403
[26]   Association of cholesteryl ester transfer protein-TaqIB polymorphism with variations in lipoprotein subclasses and coronary heart disease risk -: The Framingham study [J].
Ordovas, JM ;
Cupples, LA ;
Corella, D ;
Otvos, JD ;
Osgood, D ;
Martinez, A ;
Lahoz, C ;
Coltell, O ;
Wilson, PWF ;
Schaefer, EJ .
ARTERIOSCLEROSIS THROMBOSIS AND VASCULAR BIOLOGY, 2000, 20 (05) :1323-1329
[27]   BIAS IN RELATIVE ODDS ESTIMATION OWING TO IMPRECISE MEASUREMENT OF CORRELATED EXPOSURES [J].
PHILLIPS, AN ;
SMITH, GD .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1992, 11 (07) :953-961
[28]   HOW INDEPENDENT ARE INDEPENDENT EFFECTS - RELATIVE RISK-ESTIMATION WHEN CORRELATED EXPOSURES ARE MEASURED IMPRECISELY [J].
PHILLIPS, AN ;
SMITH, GD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1991, 44 (11) :1223-1231
[29]  
Rothman K. J., 1998, MODERN EPIDEMIOLOGY
[30]  
Shin JH, 2007, STAT APPL GENET MOL, V6