Abstract
Background Diseases diagnosed in adulthood may have antecedents throughout – including prenatal – life. Gaining a better understanding of how exposures at different stages in the lifecourse influence health outcomes is key to elucidating the potential benefits of specific disease prevention strategies. However, confounding is highly likely in studies with earlier life or time-varying exposures. Mendelian randomisation (MR) is therefore increasingly used to estimate causal effects of exposures across the lifecourse on later life outcomes.
Methods This systematic literature review aims to identify MR methods used to perform lifecourse investigations and review previous work that has utilised MR to elucidate the effects of factors acting at different stages of the lifecourse. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Medline and MedRXiv databases to comprehensively obtain lifecourse epidemiology studies that have employed MR.
Results Thirteen methodological studies were identified. Four studies focused on the impact of time-varying exposures on the interpretation of “standard” MR techniques, five presented methods for analysing repeat measures of the same exposure, and four described novel methodological approaches to handling parental exposures in relation to offspring outcomes. A further 84 studies presented the results of an applied research question with relevance to lifecourse epidemiology. Over half of these estimated effects in a single generation and were largely confined to the exploration of questions regarding body composition. Of the one generational studies employed in this review, 59% estimated the effect of exposures at birth, birth to/and childhood, birth to/and adolescence or birth to/and adulthood, 30% at childhood, childhood to/and adolescence or childhood to/and adulthood, and 11% at adolescence or adulthood. The remaining looked across two generations. These estimated effects of maternal exposures, with one study additionally examining paternal exposures, in relation to offspring outcomes.
Conclusion There is a growing body of research focused on the development and application of MR methods to address lifecourse research questions. The possibility that genetic effects have different levels of importance in the progression of an exposure at different ages should be more commonly considered for application in an MR context. Limitations exist, however, specifically regarding data constraints.
Competing Interest Statement
I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Tom G. Richardson is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline outside of this work. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
This work was in part supported by the Integrative Epidemiology Unit which receives funding from the UK Medical Research Council and the University of Bristol (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/6). GDS conducts research at the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. GMP is supported by the GW4 Biomed Doctoral Training Programme, awarded to the Universities of Bath, Bristol, Cardiff and Exeter from the Medical Research Council (MRC)/UKRI (MR/N0137941/1). TMF has received funding from the Medical Research Council (MR/T002239/1) EU-IMI SOPHIA and GSK. JT is supported by an Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS) Springboard award, which is supported by the AMS, the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, the Government Department of Business, Energy and Industrial strategy, the British Heart Foundation and Diabetes UK (SBF004\1079). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
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
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.
