Methods for meta-analysis of individual participant data from Mendelian randomisation studies with binary outcomes

被引:9
作者
Burgess, Stephen [1 ]
Thompson, Simon G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Strangeways Res Lab, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, England
关键词
Mendelian randomisation; meta-analysis; individual participant data; causal inference; INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLE ANALYSIS; BAYESIAN METHODS; BIAS; REGRESSION; COLLAPSIBILITY; IDENTIFICATION; ASSOCIATION; GENES;
D O I
10.1177/0962280212451882
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Mendelian randomisation is an epidemiological method for estimating causal associations from observational data by using genetic variants as instrumental variables. Typically the genetic variants explain only a small proportion of the variation in the risk factor of interest, and so large sample sizes are required, necessitating data from multiple sources. Meta-analysis based on individual patient data requires synthesis of studies which differ in many aspects. A proposed Bayesian framework is able to estimate a causal effect from each study, and combine these using a hierarchical model. The method is illustrated for data on C-reactive protein and coronary heart disease (CHD) from the C-reactive protein CHD Genetics Collaboration (CCGC). Studies from the CCGC differ in terms of the genetic variants measured, the study design (prospective or retrospective, population-based or case-control), whether C-reactive protein was measured, the time of C-reactive protein measurement (pre- or post-disease), and whether full or tabular data were shared. We show how these data can be combined in an efficient way to give a single estimate of causal association based on the totality of the data available. Compared to a two-stage analysis, the Bayesian method is able to incorporate data on 23% additional participants and 51% more events, leading to a 23-26% gain in efficiency.
引用
收藏
页码:272 / 293
页数:22
相关论文
共 67 条
[1]  
Angrist JD, 1996, J AM STAT ASSOC, V91, P444, DOI 10.2307/2291629
[2]  
ANGRIST JD, 1992, J AM STAT ASSOC, V87, P328
[3]  
Angrist JD, 2009, MOSTLY HARMLESS ECONOMETRICS: AN EMPIRICISTS COMPANION, P113
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2003, WinBUGS User Manual
[5]   Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing [J].
Baum, Christopher F. ;
Schaffer, Mark E. ;
Stillman, Steven .
STATA JOURNAL, 2003, 3 (01) :1-31
[6]   A cautionary note on the use of Mendelian randomization to infer causation in observational epidemiology [J].
Bochud, Murielle ;
Chiolero, Arnaud ;
Elston, Robert C. ;
Paccaud, Fred .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 37 (02) :414-416
[7]   PROBLEMS WITH INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES ESTIMATION WHEN THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE INSTRUMENTS AND THE ENDOGENOUS EXPLANATORY VARIABLE IS WEAK [J].
BOUND, J ;
JAEGER, DA ;
BAKER, RM .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 90 (430) :443-450
[8]   Mendelian randomization analysis of case-control data using structural mean models [J].
Bowden, Jack ;
Vansteelandt, Stijn .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2011, 30 (06) :678-694
[9]  
Breslow N.E., 1980, IARC Scientific Publications,, V1, P248
[10]  
Burgess S, 2012, STAT ISSUES MENDELIA, P73