Human Genetics

, Volume 123, Issue 1, pp 15–33 | Cite as

Mendelian randomization: can genetic epidemiology help redress the failures of observational epidemiology?



Establishing causal relationships between environmental exposures and common diseases is beset with problems of unresolved confounding, reverse causation and selection bias that may result in spurious inferences. Mendelian randomization, in which a functional genetic variant acts as a proxy for an environmental exposure, provides a means of overcoming these problems as the inheritance of genetic variants is independent of—that is randomized with respect to—the inheritance of other traits, according to Mendel’s law of independent assortment. Examples drawn from exposures and outcomes as diverse as milk and osteoporosis, alcohol and coronary heart disease, sheep dip and farm workers’ compensation neurosis, folate and neural tube defects are used to illustrate the applications of Mendelian randomization approaches in assessing potential environmental causes of disease. As with all genetic epidemiology studies there are problems associated with the need for large sample sizes, the non-replication of findings, and the lack of relevant functional genetic variants. In addition to these problems, Mendelian randomization findings may be confounded by other genetic variants in linkage disequilibrium with the variant under study, or by population stratification. Furthermore, pleiotropy of effect of a genetic variant may result in null associations, as may canalisation of genetic effects. If correctly conducted and carefully interpreted, Mendelian randomization studies can provide useful evidence to support or reject causal hypotheses linking environmental exposures to common diseases.


  1. Al-Delaimy WK, Rexrode KM, Hu FB, Albert CM, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Manson JE (2004) Folate intake and risk of stroke among women. Stroke 35:1259–1263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ames BN (1999) Cancer prevention and diet: help from single nucleotide polymorphisms. PNAS 96:12216–12218PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baird P (2000) Genetic technologies and achieving health for populations. Int J Health Serv 30:407–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron DN, Dent CE, Harris H, Hart EW, Jepson JB (1956) Hereditary pellagra-like skin rash with temporary cerebellar ataxia, constant renal amino-aciduria, and other bizarre biochemical features. Lancet 271:421–429PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron JA, Cole BF, Sandler RS et al (2003) A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas. N Eng J Med 348:891–899Google Scholar
  6. Bautista LE, Smeeth L, Hingorani AD, Casas JP (2006) Estimation of bias in nongenetic observational studies using “Mendelian Triangulation”. Ann Epidemiol 16:675–680PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bazzano LA, Reynolds K, Holder KN, He J (2006) Effect of folic acid supplementation on risk of cardiovascular diseases: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 296:2720–2726PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Berkowitz A (1999) Our genes, ourselves?. Bioscience 46:42–51Google Scholar
  9. Berkson J (1946) Limitations of the application of fourfold table analysis to hospital data. Biometrics Bull 2:47–53Google Scholar
  10. Bhatti P, Sigurdson AJ, Wang SS, Chen J, Rothman N, Hartge P, Bergen AW, Landi MT (2005) Genetic variation and willingness to participate in epidemiological research: data from three studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:2449–2453PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Birge SJ, Keutmann HT, Cuatrecasas P, Whedon GD (1967) Osteoporosis, intestinal lactase deficiency and low dietary calcium intake. N Engl J Med 276:445–448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bochud M, Chiolero A, Elston RC, Paccaud F (2007) A cautionary note on the use of Mendelian randomization to infer causation in observational epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. doi:10.1093/ije/dym186 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Botto LD, Yang Q (2000) 5, 10-Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene variants and congenital anomalies: a HuGE review. Am J Epidemiol 151:862–877PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Brennan P (2002) Gene environment interaction and aetiology of cancer: what does it mean and how can we measure it? Carcinogenesis 23(3):381–387PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Brennan P (2004) Mendelian randomization and gene–environment interaction. Int J Epidemiol 33:17–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Broer S, Cavanaugh JA, Rasko JEJ (2004) Neutral amino acid transport in epithelial cells and its malfunction in Hartnup disorder. Transporters 33:233–236Google Scholar
  17. Brown MS, Goldstein JL (2006) Lowering LDL—not only how low, but how long? Science 311:1721–1723PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Casas JP, Shah T, Cooper J, Hawe E, McMahon AD, Gaffney D, et al (2006) Insight into the nature of the CRP-coronary event association using Mendelian randomization. Int J Epidemiol 35:922–931PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Chao Y-C, Liou S-R, Chung Y-Y, Tang H-S, Hsu C-T, Li T-K, Yin S-J (1994) Polymorphism of alcohol and aldehyde dehydrogenase genes and alcoholic cirrhosis in Chinese patients. Hepatology 19:360–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Cherry N, Mackness M, Durrington P et al (2002) Paraoxonase (PON1) polymorphisms in farmers attributing ill health to sheep dip. Lancet 359:763–764PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Cheverud JM (1988) A comparison of genetic and phenotypic correlations. Evolution 42:958–968Google Scholar
  22. Clayton D, McKeigue PM (2001) Epidemiological methods for studying genes and environmental factors in complex diseases. Lancet 358:1356–1360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Cohen JC, Boerwinkle E, Mosely TH, Hobbs HH (2006) Sequence variations in PSCK9, low LDL, and protection against coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 354:1264–1272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Collins FS (1999) Medical and societal consequences of the Human Genome Project. N Engl J Med 341:28–37PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Corazza GR, Benati G, Di Sario A et al (1995) Lactose intolerance and bone mass in postmenopausal Italian women. Br J Nutr 73:479–487PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Correns CG (1900) Mendel’s Regel über das Verhalten der Nachkommenschaft der Bastarde. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 8:158–68. English translation, G. Mendel’s law concerning the behavior of progeny of varietal hybrids. In: Stern and Sherwood, pp 119–32. WH Freeman and Co., San Francisco (1966)Google Scholar
  27. Czeizel AE, Dudás I (1992) Prevention of the first occurrence of neural-tube defects by periconceptional vitamin supplementation. N Engl J Med 327:1832–1835PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davey Smith G (2006) Cochrane lecture: randomised by (your) god: robust inference from an observational study design. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:382–388Google Scholar
  29. Davey Smith G (2007) Capitalising on Mendelian randomization to assess the effects of treatments. J R Soc Med 100:432–435PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2002) Data dredging, bias, or confounding (editorial). BMJ 325:1437–1438Google Scholar
  31. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2003) ‘Mendelian randomization’: can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? Int J Epidemiol 32:1–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2004) Mendelian randomization: prospects, potentials, and limitations. Int J Epidemiol 33:30–42Google Scholar
  33. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2005a) What can Mendelian randomization tell us about modifiable behavioural and environmental exposures. BMJ 330:1076–1079PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2005b) Folate supplementation and cardiovascular disease. Lancet 366:1679–1681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S (2007) Mendelian randomization: genetic variants as instruments for strengthening causal inference in observational studies. In: Vaupel JW, Weinstein M (eds) Bio-social surveys: current insight and future promise. The National Academies Press, National Research Council, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  36. Davey Smith G, Phillips AN (1996) Inflation in epidemiology: ‘The proof and measurement of association between two things’ revisited. Br Med J 312:1659–1661Google Scholar
  37. Davey Smith G, Harbord R, Ebrahim S (2004) Fibrinogen, C-reactive protein and coronary heart disease: does Mendelian randomization suggest the associations are non-causal? Q J Med 97:163–166Google Scholar
  38. Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S, Lewis S, Hansell A, Palmer LJ, Burton P (2005a) Genetic epidemiology and public health: hope, hype, and future prospects. Lancet 366:1484–1498PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Davey Smith G, Lawlor D, Harbord R, Timpson N, Rumley A, Lowe G, Day I, Ebrahim S (2005b) Association of C-reactive protein with blood pressure and hypertension: lifecourse confounding and Mendelian randomization tests of causality. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 25:1051–1056PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Davey Smith G, Harbord R, Milton J, Ebrahim S, Sterne JAC (2005c) Does elevated plasma fibrinogen increase the risk of coronary heart disease?: evidence from a meta-analysis of Genetic Association Studies. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 25:2228–2233Google Scholar
  41. Davey Smith G, Lawlor D, Harbord R, Timpson N, Day I, Ebrahim S (2007) Clustered environments and randomized genes: a fundamental distinction between conventional and genetic epidemiology. PLoS Medicine (in press)Google Scholar
  42. Elwood PC, Yarnell JWG, Burr ML et al (1991) Epidemiological studies of cardiovascular disease: progress report VII. MRC Epidemiology Unit, CardiffGoogle Scholar
  43. Enomoto N, Takase S, Yasuhara M, Takada A (1991) Acetaldehyde metabolism in different aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 genotypes. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 15:141–144PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Færgeman O (2003) Coronary artery disease: genes drugs and the agricultural connection. Elseveir, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  45. Fallon UB, Ben-Shlomo Y, Davey Smith G (2001) Homocysteine and coronary heart disease. Heart Online, March 14th.
  46. Frayling TM, Timpson NJ, Weedon MN, Zeggini E, Freathy RM, Lindgren CM et al (2007) A common variant in the FTO gene is associated with body mass index and predisposes to childhood and adult obesity. Science 316:889–894PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Gause GF (1942) The relation of adaptability to adaption. Q Rev Biol 17:99–114Google Scholar
  48. Goldschmidt RB (1938) Physiological genetics. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. Gray R, Wheatley K (1991) How to avoid bias when comparing bone marrow transplantation with chemotherapy. Bone Marrow Transplant 7(suppl 3):9–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Gutjahr E, Gmel G, Rehm J (2001) Relation between average alcohol consumption and disease: an overview. Eur Addict Res 7:117–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Guy JT (1993) Oral manifestations of systematic disease. In: Cummings CW et al (eds) Otolaryngology—head and neck surgery, vol 2. Mosby, St LouisGoogle Scholar
  52. Hart C, Davey Smith G, Hole D, Hawthorne V (1999) Alcohol consumption and mortality from all causes, coronary heart disease, and stroke: results from a prospective cohort study of Scottish men with 21 years of follow up. Br Med J 318:1725–1729Google Scholar
  53. Hasin D, Aharonovich E, Liu X, Mamman Z, Matseoane K, Carr L, Li TK (2002) Alcohol and ADH2 in Israel: Ashkenazis, Sephardics, and recent Russian immigrants. Am J Psychiatry 159:1432–1434PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. He K, Merchant A, Rimm EB, Rosner BA, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Ascherio A (2004) Folate, vitamin B6, and B12 intakes in relation to risk of stroke among men. Stroke 35:169–174PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group (writing committee: Collins R, Armitage J, Parish S, Sleight, Peto R) (2002) MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 360:7–22Google Scholar
  56. Higuchi S, Matsuushita S, Imazeki H, Kinoshita T, Takagi S, Kono H (1994) Aldehyde dehydrogenase genotypes in Japanese alcoholics. Lancet 343:741–742PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Hingorani A, Humphries S (2005) Nature’s randomised trials. Lancet 366:1906–1908PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Holtzman NA (2001) Putting the search for genes in perspective. Int J Health Serv 31:445PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Honkanen R, Pulkkinen P, Järvinen R, Kröger H, Lindstedt K, Tuppurainen M, Uusitupa M (1996) Does lactose intolerance predispose to low bone density? A population-based study of perimenopausal Finnish women. Bone 19:23–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Honkanen R, Kröger H, Alhava E, Turpeinen P, Tuppurainen M, Saarikoski S (1997) Lactose intolerance associated with fractures of weight-bearing bones in Finnish Women aged 38–57 years. Bone 21:473–477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Hyppönen E, Davey Smith G, Power C (2007) Vitamin D status and self-perceived health: conventional and Mendelian randomisation approaches. J Epidemiol Community Health 61(suppl1):A14Google Scholar
  62. Jablonka-Tavory E (1982) Genocopies and the evolution of interdependence. Evol Theory 6:167–170Google Scholar
  63. Jousilahti P, Salomaa V (2004) Fibrinogen, social position, and Mendelian randomisation. J Epidemiol Community Health 58:883PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Juul K, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Marklund S, Heegaard NHH, Steffensen R, Sillesen H, Jensen G, Nordestgaard BG (2004) Genetically reduced antioxidative protection and increased ischaemic heart disease risk: the Copenhagen city heart study. Circulation 109:59–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Katan MB (1986) Apoliopoprotein E isoforms, serum cholesterol, and cancer. Lancet I:507–508 (reprinted IJE 2004;34:9)Google Scholar
  66. Keavney B (2002) Genetic epidemiological studies of coronary heart disease. Int J Epidemiol 31:730–736PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Kelada SN, Eaton DL, Wang SS, Rothman NR, Khoury MJ (2003) The role of genetic polymorphisms in environmental health. Environ Health Perspect 111:1055–1064PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Khoury M, Beaty TH, Cohen BH (1993) Fundamentals of genetic epidemiology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 13, 126Google Scholar
  69. Khoury M, Little J, Burke W (2004) Human genome epidemiology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  70. Khoury M, Davis R, Gwinn M, Lindegren ML, Yoon P (2005) Do we need genomic research for the prevention of common diseases with environmental causes? Am J Epidemiol 161:799–805PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Khoury MJ, Little J, Gwinn M, Ioannidis JPA (2007) On the synthesis and interpretation of consistent but weak gene–disease association studies in the era of genome-wide association studies. Int J Epidemiol 36:439–445PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Kivimäki M, Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Eklund C, Murme M, Lehtimäki T, Viikari JS, Raitakari OT (2007) Variants in the CRP Gene as a measure of lifelong differences in average C-reactive protein levels. The cardiovascular risk in young Finns study, 1980–2001. Am J Epidemiol 166:760–764PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Kraut JA, Sachs G (2005) Hartnup disorder: unravelling the mystery. Trends Pharmacol Sci 26:53–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Kune GA, Kune S, Watson LF (1988) Colorectal cancer risk, chronic illnesses, operations and medications: case control results from the Melbourne Colorectal Cancer Study. Cancer Res 48:4399–4404PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Lawlor DA, Harbord R, Sterne JAC, Timpson N, Davey Smith G (2007) Mendelian randomization: using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology. Stats Med. doi: 10.1002/sim.3034 Google Scholar
  76. Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Bruckdorfer KR et al (2004) Those confounded vitamins: what can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? Lancet 363:1724–1727PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. LDL receptor mutation catalogue. Accessed 16 Dec 2003
  78. Leimar O, Hammerstein P, Van Dooren TJM (2006) A new perspective on developmental plasticity and the principles of adaptive morph determination. Am Nat 167:367–376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Lenz W (1973) Phenocopies. J Med Genet 10:34–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Lewis S, Davey Smith G (2005) Alcohol, ALDH2 and esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis which illustrates the potentials and limitations of a Mendelian randomization approach. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:1967–1971PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Lewis SJ, Ebrahim S, Davey Smith G (2005) Meta-analysis of MTHFR 677C->T polymorphism and coronary heart disease: does totality of evidence support causal role for homocysteine and preventive potential of folate? BMJ 331:1053PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Li R, Tsaih SW, Shockley K, Stylianou IM, Wergedal J,Paigen B, Churchill GA (2006) Structural model analysis of multiple quantative traits. PLoS Genet 2:1046–1057Google Scholar
  83. Lin HJ, Lakkides KM, Keku TO, Reddy ST, Louie AD et al (2002) Prostaglandin H Synthase 2 variant (Val511Ala) in African Americans may reduce the risk for colorectal neoplasia. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11:1305–1315PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Lipp HP, Schwegler H, Crusio WE, Wolfer DP, Leisinger-Trigona MC, Heimrich B, Driscoll P (1989) Using genetically-defined rodent strains for the identification of hippocampal traits relevant for two-way avoidance behaviour: a non-invasive approach. Experientia 45:845–859PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Lower GM, Nilsson T, Nelson CE et al (1979) N-acetylransferase phenotype and risk in urinary bladder cancer: approaches in molecular epidemiology. Environ Health Perspect 29:71–79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Marks D, Thorogood M, Neil HAW, Humphries SE (2003) A review on diagnosis, natural history and treatment of familial hypercholesterolaemia. Atherosclerosis 168:1–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. McGrath J (1999) Hypothesis: is low prenatal vitamin D a risk-modifying factor for schizophrenia? Schizophr Res 40:173–177PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. McNamara JJ, Molot MA, Stremple JF, Cutting RT (1971) Coronary artery disease in combat casualties in Vietnam. JAMA 216:1185–1187PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Meade TW, Humpries SE, De Stavola BL (2006) Commentary: fibrinogen and coronary heart disease—test of causality by “Mendelian” randomization by Keavney et al. Int J Epidemiol 35:944–947PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Memik F (2003) Alcohol and esophageal cancer, is there an exaggerated accusation? Hepatogastroenterology 54:1953–1955Google Scholar
  91. Mendel G (1866) Experiments in plant hybridization.
  92. Minelli C, Thompson JR, Tobin MD, Abrams KR (2004) An integrated approach to the meta-analysis of genetic association studies using Mendelian randomization. Am J Epidemiol 160:445–452PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Morgan TH (1913) Heredity and sex. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  94. Morgan TH (1918) Physical basis of heredityGoogle Scholar
  95. MRC Vitamin Study Research Group (1991) Prevention of neural tube defects: results of the Medical Research Council vitamin study. Lancet 338:131–137Google Scholar
  96. Myant NB (1993) Familial defective apolipoprotein B-100: a review, including some comparisons with familial hypercholesterolaemia. Atherosclerosis 104:1–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Ness AR, Davey Smith G, Hart C (2001) Milk, coronary heart disease and mortality. J Epidemiol Community Health 55:379–382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Newcomer AD, Hodgson SF, Douglas MD, Thomas PJ (1978) Lactase deficiency: prevalence in osteoporosis. Ann Intern Med 89:218–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Nitsch D, Molokhia M, Smeeth L, De Stavola B, Whittaker JC, Leon DA (2006) Limits to causal inference based on Mendelian randomization: a comparison with randomized controlled trials. Am J Epidemiol 163:397–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Obermayer-Pietsch BM, Bonelli CM, Walter DE, Kuhn RJ, Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Berghold A, Goessler W, Stepan V, Dobnig H, Leb G, Renner W (2004) Genetic predisposition for adult lactose intolerance and relation to diet, bone density, and bone fractures. J Bone Miner Res 19:42–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Olby RC (1966) Origins of Mendelism. Constable LondonGoogle Scholar
  102. Palmer L, Cardon L (2005) Shaking the tree: mapping complex disease genes with linkage disequilibrium. Lancet 366:1223–1234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Peto R (1976) Two properties of multiple regression analysis and regression to the mean (and regression from the mean). In: Fletcher CM, Peto R, Tinker CM, Speizer FE (eds) The natural history of chronic bronchitis and emphysema: an eight year study of early chronic obstructive lung disease in working men in London. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 218–223Google Scholar
  104. Reynolds K, Lewis LB, Nolen JDL, Kinney GL, Sathya B, He J (2003) Alcohol consumption and risk of stroke: a meta-analysis. JAMA 289:579–588PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. Roderic TH, Wimer RE, Wimer CC (1976) Genetic manipulation of neuroanatomical traits. In: Petrinovich L, McGaugh JL (eds) Knowing thinking and believing. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  106. Rose G (1982) Incubation period of coronary heart disease. BMJ 284:1600–1601PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. Rose S (1995) The rise of neurogenetic determinism. Nature 373:380–382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. Rothman N, Wacholder S, Caporaso NE, Garcia-Closas M, Buetow K, Fraumeni JF (2001) The use of common genetic polymorphisms to enhance the epidemiologic study of environmental carcinogens. Biochim Biophys Acta 1471:C1–C10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Sandler RS, Galanko JC, Murray SC, Helm JF, Woosley JT (1998) Aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory gents and risk for colorectal adenomas. Gastroenterology 114:441–447PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. Sandler RS, Halabi S, Baron JA et al (2003) A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas in patients with previous colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 348:883–890PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Scientific Steering Committee on behalf of the Simon Broome Register Group (1991) Risk of fatal coronary heart disease in familial hyper-cholesterolaemia. BMJ 303:893–896Google Scholar
  112. Scriver CR (1988) Nutrient–gene interactions: the gene is not the disease and vice versa. Am J Clin Nutr 48:1505–1509PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. Scriver CR, Mahon B, Levy HL (1987) The Hartnup phenotypeL Mendelain transport disorder, multifactorial disease. Am J Hum Genet 40:401–412PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. Shaper AG, Wannamethee G, Walker M (1991) Milk, butter and heart disease. BMJ 302:785–786PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I et al for the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group (1995) Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 333:1301–1307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. Slack J (1969) Risks of ischaemic heart disease in familial hyperlipoproteinaemic states. Lancet 2:1380–1382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. Snyder LH (1959) Fifty years of medical genetics. Science 129:7–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Soria LF, Ludwig EH, Clarke HRG, Vega GL, Grundy SM, McCarthy BJ (1989) Association between a specific apolipoprotein B mutation and familial defective apolipoprotein B-100. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86:587–591PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. Spearman C (1904) The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am J Psychol 15:72–101Google Scholar
  120. Steinberg D (2004) Thematic review series: the pathogensis of athersclerosis. An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy: part 1. J Lipid Res 45:1583–1593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. Steinberg D (2005) Thematic review series: the pathogensis of athersclerosis. An interpretive history of the cholesterol controversy: part II: the early evidence linking hypercholestrolemia to cornary disease in humans. J Lipid Res 46:179–190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. Strohman RC (1993) Ancient genomes, wise bodies, unhealthy people: the limits of a genetic paradigm in biology and medicine. Perspect Biol Med 37:112–145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. Takagi S, Iwai N, Yamauchi R, Kojima S, Yasuno S, Baba T, Terashima M, Tsutsumi Y, Suzuki S, Morii I, Hanai S, Ono K, Baba S, Tomoike H, Kawamura A, Miyazaki S (2002) Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 gene is a risk factor for myocardial infarction in Japanese Mmen. Hypertens Res 25:677–681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. Keavney B, Danesh J, Parish S, Palmer A, Clark S, Youngman L, Delépine M, Lathrop M, Peto R, Collins R The International Studies of Infarct Survival (ISIS) Collaborators (2006) Fibrinogen and coronary heart disease: test of causality by ‘Mendelian randomization’. Int J Epidemiol 35:935–943PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. Thomas DC, Lawlor DA, Thompson JR (2007) Re: Estimation of bias in nongenetic observational studies using “Mendelian Triangulation”. Ann Epidemiol 17:511–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. Thun MJ, Peto R, Lopez AD (1997) Alcohol consumption and mortality among middle-aged and elderly US adults. New Engl J Med 337:1705–1714PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. Timpson NJ, Lawlor DA, Harbord RM, Gaunt TR, Day INM, Palmer LJ, Hattersley AT, Ebrahim S, Lowe GDO, Rumley A, Davey Smith G (2005) C-reactive protein and its role in metabolic syndrome: mendelian randomization study. Lancet 366:1954–1959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. Toole JF, Malinow MR, Chambless LE, Spence JD, Pettigrew LC, Howard VJ et al (2004) Lowering homocysteine in patients with ischemic stroke to prevent recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, and death: the Vitamin Intervention for Stroke Prevention (VISP) randomized controlled trial. JAMA 294:565–575Google Scholar
  129. Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Humphries SE (1992) Familial defective apolipoprotein B-100: a single mutation that causes hypercholesterolemia and premature coronary artery disease. Atherosclerosis 96:91–107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. Tybjærg-Hansen A, Steffenson R, Meinertz H, Schnohr P, Nordestgaard BG (1998) Association of mutations in the apolipoprotein B gene with hypercholesterolemia and the risk of ischemic heart disease. New Engl J Med 338:1577–1584PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. Van der Bom JG, De Maat MPM, Bots ML, Haverkate F, De Jong PTVM, Hofman A, Kluft C, Grobbee DE (1998) Elevated plasma fibrinogen. Cause or consequence of cardiovascular disease? Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 18:621–625PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. Wald DS, Law M, Morris JK (2002) Homocysteine and cardiovascular disease: evidence on causality from a meta-analysis. BMJ 325:1202–1206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. Weimer RE (1973) Dissociation of phenotypic correlation: response to posttrial etherization and to temporal distribution of practice trials. Behav Genet 3:379–386Google Scholar
  134. Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (2007) Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature 447:661–678Google Scholar
  135. West-Eberhard MJ (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  136. Wheatley K, Gray R (2004) Commentary: Mendelian randomization—an update on its use to evaluate allogeneic stem cell transplantation in leukaemia. Int J Epidemiol 33:15–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. Williams RS, Wagner PD (2000) Transgenic animals in integrative biology: approaches and interpretations of outcome. J Appl Physiol 88:1119–1126PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. Wolf U (1995) The genetic contribution to the phenotype. Hum Genet 95:127–148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. Youngman LD, Keavney BD, Palmer A et al (2000) Plasma fibrinogen and fibrinogen genotypes in 4685 cases of myocardial infarction and in 6002 controls: test of causality by “Mendelian randomization”. Circulation 102(suppl II):31–32Google Scholar
  140. Zeggini E, Weedon MN, Lindgren CM, Frayling TM, Elliott KS, Lango H et al (2007) Replication of genome-wide association signals in UK samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science 316:1336–1341PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. Zoccali C, Testa A, Spoto B, Tripepi G, Mallamaci F (2006) Mendelian randomization: a new approach to studying epidemiology in ESRD. Am J Kidney Dis 47:332–341PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. Zuckerkandl E, Villet R (1988) Concentration—affinity equlivalence in gene regulation: convergence and environmental effects. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:4784–4788PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Noncommunicable Diseases Epidemiology Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Population HealthLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineLondonUK
  2. 2.MRC Centre for Causal Analyses in Translational Epidemiology, Department of Social MedicineUniversity of BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations