Abstract:Background: Two-sample summary-data Mendelian randomization (MR) incorporating multiple genetic variants within a meta-analysis framework is a popular technique for assessing causality in epidemiology. If all genetic variants satisfy the instrumental variable (IV) and necessary modelling assumptions, then their individual ratio estimates of causal effect should be homogeneous. Observed heterogeneity signals that one or more of these assumptions could have been violated. Methods: Causal estimation and heterogeneity assessment in MR require an approximation for the variance, or equivalently the inverse-variance weight, of each ratio estimate. We show that the most popular 'first-order' weights can lead to an inflation in the chances of detecting heterogeneity when in fact it is not present. Conversely, ostensibly more accurate 'second-order' weights can dramatically increase the chances of failing to detect heterogeneity when it is truly present. We derive modified weights to mitigate both of these adverse effects. Results: Using Monte Carlo simulations, we show that the modified weights outperform first- and second-order weights in terms of heterogeneity quantification. Modified weights are also shown to remove the phenomenon of regression dilution bias in MR estimates obtained from weak instruments, unlike those obtained using first- and second-order weights. However, with small numbers of weak instruments, this comes at the cost of a reduction in estimate precision and power to detect a causal effect compared with first-order weighting. Moreover, first-order weights always furnish unbiased estimates and preserve the type I error rate under the causal null. We illustrate the utility of the new method using data from a recent two-sample summary-data MR analysis to assess the causal role of systolic blood pressure on coronary heart disease risk. Conclusions: We propose the use of modified weights within two-sample summary-data MR studies for accurately quantifying heterogeneity and detecting outliers in the presence of weak instruments. Modified weights also have an important role to play in terms of causal estimation (in tandem with first-order weights) but further research is required to understand their strengths and weaknesses in specific settings.

Selecting invalid instruments to improve Mendelian randomization with two-sample summary data

Robust instrumental variable methods using multiple candidate instruments with application to Mendelian randomization

Mendelian randomization with fine-mapped genetic data: Choosing from large numbers of correlated instrumental variables

Weak instruments in multivariable Mendelian randomization: methods and practice

Inference After Selecting Plausibly Valid Instruments with Application to Mendelian Randomization

Consistent Estimation in Mendelian Randomization with Some Invalid Instruments Using a Weighted Median Estimator

Selecting instruments for Mendelian randomization in the wake of genome-wide association studies

Testing and correcting for weak and pleiotropic instruments in two‐sample multivariable Mendelian randomization

Instrumental Variables Estimation with Some Invalid Instruments and its Application to Mendelian Randomization

Incorporating biological and clinical insights into variant choice for Mendelian randomisation: examples and principles

Improving the accuracy of two-sample summary-data Mendelian randomization: moving beyond the NOME assumption

MR-SPLIT: a novel method to address selection and weak instrument bias in one-sample Mendelian randomization studies

GENIUS-MAWII: for robust Mendelian randomization with many weak invalid instruments

A review of instrumental variable estimators for Mendelian randomization

Weak-Instrument Robust Tests in Two-Sample Summary-Data Mendelian Randomization

Likelihood-based Mendelian randomization analysis with automated instrument selection and horizontal pleiotropic modeling

Mendelian randomization mixed‐scale treatment effect robust identification and estimation for causal inference

Mendelian Randomization when Many Instruments are Invalid: Hierarchical Empirical Bayes Estimation

Statistical Methods for cis-Mendelian Randomization with Two-sample Summary-level Data

LASSO-type instrumental variable selection methods with an application to Mendelian randomization

Mendelian Randomization With Refined Instrumental Variables From Genetic Score Improves Accuracy and Reduces Bias