ABSTRACT
Mendelian randomization may give biased causal estimates if the instrument affects the outcome not solely via the exposure of interest (violating the exclusion restriction assumption). We demonstrate use of a global randomization test as a falsification test for the exclusion restriction assumption. Using simulations, we explored the statistical power of the randomization test to detect an association between a genetic instrument and a covariate set due to a) selection bias or b) horizontal pleiotropy, compared to three approaches examining associations with individual covariates: i) Bonferroni correction for the number of covariates, and ii) correction for the effective number of independent covariates and iii) an r2 permutation-based approach. We conducted proof-of-principle analyses in UK Biobank, using CRP as the exposure and coronary heart disease (CHD) as the outcome. In simulations, power of the randomization test was higher than the other approaches for detecting selection bias when the correlation between the covariates was low (R2< 0.1), and at least as powerful as the other approaches across all simulated horizontal pleiotropy scenarios. In our applied example, we found strong evidence of selection bias using all approaches (e.g., global randomization test p<0.002). We identified 51 of the 58 CRP genetic variants as horizontally pleiotropic, and estimated effects of CRP on CHD attenuated somewhat to the null when excluding these from the genetic risk score (OR=0.956 [95% CI: 0.918, 0.996] versus 0.970 [95% CI: 0.900, 1.046] per 1-unit higher log CRP levels). The global randomization test can be a useful addition to the MR researcher’ s toolkit.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
LACM, GDS & KT work in a Unit supported by the Medical Research Council for the Integrative Epidemiology Unit (MC_UU_00011/1&3) at the University of Bristol.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee of UK Biobank gave ethical approval for this work (under UK Biobank application number 16729).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
UK Biobank data can be accessed by bona fide researchers through the UK Biobank data access portal.