We leveraged genetic variants associated with caffeine metabolism in the two-sample Mendelian randomization framework to investigate the effect of plasma caffeine levels on the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. Genetic association estimates for the outcomes were obtained from the International Genomics of Alzheimer’s Project, the International Parkinson’s Disease Genomics consortium, the FinnGen consortium, and the UK Biobank. Genetically predicted higher plasma caffeine levels were associated with a non-significant lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease (odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.76, 1.00; p = 0.056). A suggestive association was observed for genetically predicted higher plasma caffeine levels and lower risk of Parkinson’s disease in the FinnGen consortium. but not in the International Parkinson’s Disease Genomics consortium; no overall association was found (odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.77, 1.10; p = 0.347). This study found possible suggestive evidence of a protective role of caffeine in Alzheimer’s disease. The association between caffeine and Parkinson’s disease requires further study.

Background: Two-sample Mendelian randomization (2SMR) is an increasingly popular epidemiological method that uses genetic variants as instruments for making causal inferences. Clear reporting of methods employed in such studies is important for evaluating their underlying quality. However, the quality of methodological reporting of 2SMR studies is currently unclear. We aimed to assess the reporting quality of studies that used MR-Base, one of the most popular platforms for implementing 2SMR analysis. Methods: We created a bespoke reporting checklist to evaluate reporting quality of 2SMR studies. We then searched Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar citations of the MR-Base descriptor paper to identify published MR studies that used MR-Base for any component of the MR analysis. Study screening and data extraction were performed by at least two independent reviewers. Results: In the primary analysis, 87 studies were included. Reporting quality was generally poor across studies, with a mean of 53% (SD = 14%) of items reported in each study. Many items required for evaluating the validity of key assumptions made in MR were poorly reported: only 44% of studies provided sufficient details for assessing if the genetic variant associates with the exposure (‘relevance’ assumption), 31% for assessing if there are any variant-outcome confounders (‘independence’ assumption), 89% for the assessing if the variant causes the outcome independently of the exposure (‘exclusion restriction’ assumption) and 32% for assumptions of falsification tests. We did not find evidence of a change in reporting quality over time or a difference in reporting quality between studies that used MR-Base and a random sample of MR studies that did not use this platform. Conclusions: The quality of reporting of two-sample Mendelian randomization studies in our sample was generally poor. Journals and researchers should consider using the STROBE-MR guidelines to improve reporting quality.

Mendelian randomisation (MR) is an increasingly popular method for strengthening causal inference in epidemiological studies. cis-MR in particular uses genetic variants in the gene region of a drug target protein as an instrumental variable to provide quasi-experimental evidence for on-target drug effects. A limitation of this framework is when the genetic variant is correlated to another variant that also effects the outcome of interest (confounding through linkage disequilibrium). Methods for correcting this bias, such as multivariable MR, struggle in a cis setting because of the high correlation among genetic variants. Here, through simulation experiments and an applied example considering the effect of interleukin 6 receptor signaling on coronary artery disease risk, we present an alternative method for attenuating bias that does not suffer from this problem. As our method uses both MR and the product and difference method for mediation analysis, our proposal inherits all assumptions of these methods. We have additionally developed an R package, TwoStepCisMR, to facilitate the implementation of the method.

While the number of studies using Mendelian randomization (MR) methods has grown exponentially in the last decade, the quality of reporting of these studies often has been poor. Similar to other reporting guidelines such as CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) for randomised trials and STROBE (STrenghtening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology) for observational studies in epidemiology, the STROBE-MR working group aims to provide guidance to authors on how to improve reporting of MR studies and help readers, reviewers, and journal editors to evaluate the quality of the presented evidence. Empirical evidence indicates that many reports of MR studies do not clearly state or examine the various assumptions of MR methods and report insufficient details on the data sources, which makes it hard to evaluate the quality and reliability of the results. The STROBE-MR guidance covers both one sample and two sample MR studies. At present, the draft checklist consists of 20 items, organized into the title and abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. As these guidelines aim to reach the entire MR community, we would like to give everyone the opportunity to contribute their comments. The following draft of the STROBE-MR checklist is open for public discussion and all feedback will be taken into account during its next revision. For feedback, please use the comment section below this post on PeerJ Preprints. We hope the final guidelines will serve the entire community and contribute to improving the reporting of MR studies in the future.

Objective To investigate the association of genetically proxied (using a surrogate biomarker) inhibition of phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5), an established drug target for erectile dysfunction, with fertility, sexual behaviour, and subjective wellbeing. Design Two sample cis-mendelian randomisation study. Setting Summary data on genetic associations obtained from the International Consortium for Blood Pressure and UK Biobank. Participants Individuals of European ancestry from the International Consortium for Blood Pressure (n=757 601) for estimating PDE5 inhibition (using the surrogate biomarker of diastolic blood pressure reduction), and UK Biobank (n=211 840) for estimating the fertility, sexual behaviour, and subjective wellbeing outcomes in male participants. Intervention Genetically proxied PDE5 inhibition. Main outcome measures Number of children fathered, number of sexual partners, probability of never having had sexual intercourse, and subjective wellbeing. Results Genetically proxied PDE5 inhibition was associated with male participants having 0.28 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.39) more children (false discovery rate corrected P<0.001). This association was not identified in female participants. No evidence was found of an association between genetically proxied PDE5 inhibition and number of sexual partners, probability of never having had sexual intercourse, or self-reported wellbeing in male participants. Conclusions The findings of this study provide genetic support for PDE5 inhibition potentially increasing the number of children fathered by male individuals. Absence of this association in female participants supports increased propensity for sustained and robust penile erections as a potential underlying mechanism. Further studies are required to confirm this, however, and these findings should not promote indiscriminate use of PDE5 inhibitors, which can also have harmful adverse effects.