Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology 5/2021

Open Access 01-05-2021 | ESSAY

Mendelian randomisation for mediation analysis: current methods and challenges for implementation

Authors: Alice R. Carter, Eleanor Sanderson, Gemma Hammerton, Rebecca C. Richmond, George Davey Smith, Jon Heron, Amy E. Taylor, Neil M. Davies, Laura D. Howe

Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology | Issue 5/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Mediation analysis seeks to explain the pathway(s) through which an exposure affects an outcome. Traditional, non-instrumental variable methods for mediation analysis experience a number of methodological difficulties, including bias due to confounding between an exposure, mediator and outcome and measurement error. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can be used to improve causal inference for mediation analysis. We describe two approaches that can be used for estimating mediation analysis with MR: multivariable MR (MVMR) and two-step MR. We outline the approaches and provide code to demonstrate how they can be used in mediation analysis. We review issues that can affect analyses, including confounding, measurement error, weak instrument bias, interactions between exposures and mediators and analysis of multiple mediators. Description of the methods is supplemented by simulated and real data examples. Although MR relies on large sample sizes and strong assumptions, such as having strong instruments and no horizontally pleiotropic pathways, our simulations demonstrate that these methods are unaffected by confounders of the exposure or mediator and the outcome and non-differential measurement error of the exposure or mediator. Both MVMR and two-step MR can be implemented in both individual-level MR and summary data MR. MR mediation methods require different assumptions to be made, compared with non-instrumental variable mediation methods. Where these assumptions are more plausible, MR can be used to improve causal inference in mediation analysis.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173–82.CrossRefPubMed Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173–82.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat Interface. 2009;2(4):457–68.CrossRef VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat Interface. 2009;2(4):457–68.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S. “Mendelian randomization”: can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(1):1–22.CrossRef Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S. “Mendelian randomization”: can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(1):1–22.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Greenland S, Robins JM, Pearl J. Confounding and collapsibility in causal inference. Stat Sci. 1999;14(1):29–46.CrossRef Greenland S, Robins JM, Pearl J. Confounding and collapsibility in causal inference. Stat Sci. 1999;14(1):29–46.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Mendelian randomisation for mediation analysis: current methods and challenges for implementation
Authors
Alice R. Carter
Eleanor Sanderson
Gemma Hammerton
Rebecca C. Richmond
George Davey Smith
Jon Heron
Amy E. Taylor
Neil M. Davies
Laura D. Howe
Publication date
01-05-2021
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
European Journal of Epidemiology / Issue 5/2021
Print ISSN: 0393-2990
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7284
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-021-00757-1

Other articles of this Issue 5/2021

European Journal of Epidemiology 5/2021 Go to the issue