4.7 Review

A review of Mendelian randomization in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

BRAIN
卷 145, 期 3, 页码 832-842

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awab420

关键词

Mendelian randomization; amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; epidemiology

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [CEGS 5P50HG00773504, 1P50HL083800, 1R01HL101388, 1R01HL122939, S10OD025212, P30DK116074, UM1HG009442]
  2. Wellcome Trust [216596/Z/19/Z]
  3. NIHR [NF-SI-0617-10077]
  4. Kingsland fellowship
  5. NIHR Sheffield Biomedical Research Centre for Translational Neuroscience [IS-BRC121520017]
  6. Wellcome Trust [216596/Z/19/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mendelian randomization studies on amyotrophic lateral sclerosis show a causal link between blood lipids and the disease risk, while factors like smoking and immune function require further investigation for confirmation. The use of high methodological standards and replication across different datasets are essential for reliable results in Mendelian randomization studies.
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 data sets 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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据