Using family members to augment genetic case-control studies of a life-threatening disease

A review of Mendelian randomization in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a relatively common and rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease that, in the majority of cases, is thought to be determined by a complex gene-environment interaction. Exponential growth in the number of performed genome-wide association studies combined with the advent of Mendelian randomization is opening significant new opportunities to identify environmental exposures that increase or decrease the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Each of these discoveries has the potential to shape new therapeutic interventions. However, to do so, rigorous methodological standards must be applied in the performance of Mendelian randomization. We have reviewed Mendelian randomization studies performed in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis to date. We identified 20 Mendelian randomization studies, including evaluation of physical exercise, adiposity, cognitive performance, immune function, blood lipids, sleep behaviours, educational attainment, alcohol consumption, smoking and type 2 diabetes mellitus. We have evaluated each study using gold standard methodology supported by the Mendelian randomization literature and the STROBE-Mendelian randomization checklist. Where discrepancies exist between Mendelian randomization studies, we suggest the underlying reasons. A number of studies conclude that there is a causal link between blood lipids and risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; replication across different datasets and even different populations adds confidence. For other putative risk factors, such as smoking and immune function, Mendelian randomization studies have provided cause for doubt. We highlight the use of positive control analyses in choosing exposure single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to make up the Mendelian randomization instrument, use of SNP clumping to avoid false positive results due to SNPs in linkage and the importance of multiple testing correction. We discuss the implications of survival bias for study of late age of onset diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and make recommendations to mitigate this potentially important confounder. For Mendelian randomization to be useful to the amyotrophic lateral sclerosis field, high methodological standards must be applied to ensure reproducibility. Mendelian randomization is already an impactful tool, but poor-quality studies will lead to incorrect interpretations by a field that includes non-statisticians, wasted resources and missed opportunities.

Survival Bias in Mendelian Randomization Studies: A Threat to Causal Inference

It has been argued that survival bias may distort results in Mendelian randomization studies in older populations. Through simulations of a simple causal structure we investigate the degree to which instrumental variable (IV)-estimators may become biased in the context of exposures that affect survival. We observed that selecting on survival decreased instrument strength and, for exposures with directionally concordant effects on survival (and outcome), introduced downward bias of the IV-estimator when the exposures reduced the probability of survival till study inclusion. Higher ages at study inclusion generally increased this bias, particularly when the true causal effect was not equal to null. Moreover, the bias in the estimated exposure-outcome relation depended on whether the estimation was conducted in the one- or two-sample setting. Finally, we briefly discuss which statistical approaches might help to alleviate this and other types of selection bias. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B589.

Gene-based and pathway-based testing for rare-variant association in affected sib pairs

Next generation sequencing technologies have made it possible to investigate the role of rare variants (RVs) in disease etiology. Because RVs associated with disease susceptibility tend to be enriched in families with affected individuals, study designs based on affected sib pairs (ASP) can be more powerful than case-control studies. We construct tests of RV-set association in ASPs for single genomic regions as well as for multiple regions. Single-region tests can efficiently detect a gene region harboring susceptibility variants, while multiple-region extensions are meant to capture signals dispersed across a biological pathway, potentially as a result of locus heterogeneity. Within ascertained ASPs, the test statistics contrast the frequencies of duplicate rare alleles (usually appearing on a shared haplotype) against frequencies of a single rare allele copy (appearing on a nonshared haplotype); we call these allelic parity tests. Incorporation of minor allele frequency estimates from reference populations can markedly improve test efficiency. Under various genetic penetrance models, application of the tests in simulated ASP data sets demonstrates good type I error properties as well as power gains over approaches that regress ASP rare allele counts on sharing state, especially in small samples. We discuss robustness of the allelic parity methods to the presence of genetic linkage, misspecification of reference population allele frequencies, sequencing error and de novo mutations, and population stratification. As proof of principle, we apply single- and multiple-region tests in a motivating study data set consisting of whole exome sequencing of sisters ascertained with early onset breast cancer.