Search

Introduction Genetic associations for variants identified through genome-wide association studies (GWASs) tend to be overestimated in the original discovery data set as, if the association was underestimated, the variant may not have been detected. This bias, known as winner's curse, can affect Mendelian randomization estimates, but its severity and potential impact are unclear. Methods We performed an empirical investigation to assess the potential bias from winner's curse in practice. We considered Mendelian randomization estimates for the effect of body mass index (BMI) on coronary artery disease risk. We randomly divided a UK Biobank data set 100 times into three equally sized subsets. The first subset was treated as the 'discovery GWAS'. We compared genetic associations estimated in the discovery GWAS to those estimated in the other subsets for each of the 100 iterations. Results For variants associated with BMI at P  <   5 × 10–8 in at least one iteration, genetic associations with BMI were up to 5-fold greater in iterations in which the variant was associated with BMI at P  <   5 × 10–8 compared with its mean association across all iterations. If the minimum P -value for association with BMI was P  =   10–13 or lower, then this inflation was <25%. Mendelian randomization estimates were affected by winner's curse bias. However, bias did not materially affect results; all analyses indicated a deleterious effect of BMI on coronary artery disease risk. Conclusions Winner's curse can bias Mendelian randomization estimates, although its practical impact may not be substantial. If avoiding sample overlap is infeasible, analysts should consider performing a sensitivity analysis based on variants strongly associated with the exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background An increasing proportion of people have a body mass index (BMI) classified as overweight or obese and published studies disagree whether this will be beneficial or detrimental to health. We applied and evaluated two intergenerational instrumental variable methods to estimate the average causal effect of BMI on mortality in a cohort with many deaths: the parents of UK Biobank participants. Methods In Cox regression models, parental BMI was instrumented by offspring BMI using an 'offspring as instrument' (OAI) estimation and by offspring BMI-related genetic variants in a 'proxy-genotype Mendelian randomization' (PGMR) estimation. Results Complete-case analyses were performed in parents of 233 361 UK Biobank participants with full phenotypic, genotypic and covariate data. The PGMR method suggested that higher BMI increased mortality with hazard ratios per kg/m2 of 1.02 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.04) for mothers and 1.04 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.05) for fathers. The OAI method gave considerably higher estimates, which varied according to the parent–offspring pairing between 1.08 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.10; mother–son) and 1.23 (95% CI: 1.16, 1.29; father–daughter). Conclusion Both methods supported a causal role of higher BMI increasing mortality, although caution is required regarding the immediate causal interpretation of these exact values. Evidence of instrument invalidity from measured covariates was limited for the OAI method and minimal for the PGMR method. The methods are complementary for interrogating the average putative causal effects because the biases are expected to differ between them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]