Mendelian randomisation (MR) analysis is an important tool to elucidate the causal relevance of environmental and biological risk factors for disease. However, causal inference is undermined if genetic variants used to instrument a risk factor also influence alternative disease-pathways (horizontal pleiotropy). Here we report how the 'no horizontal pleiotropy assumption' is strengthened when proteins are the risk factors of interest. Proteins are typically the proximal effectors of biological processes encoded in the genome. Moreover, proteins are the targets of most medicines, so MR studies of drug targets are becoming a fundamental tool in drug development. To enable such studies, we introduce a mathematical framework that contrasts MR analysis of proteins with that of risk factors located more distally in the causal chain from gene to disease. We illustrate key model decisions and introduce an analytical framework for maximising power and evaluating the robustness of analyses.

ObjectiveTo investigate the distribution, design characteristics, and dissemination of clinical trials by funding organisation and medical specialty.DesignCross sectional descriptive analysis.Data sourcesTrial protocol information from clinicaltrials.gov, metadata of journal articles in which trial results were published (PubMed), and quality metrics of associated journals from SCImago Journal and Country Rank database.Selection criteriaAll 45 620 clinical trials evaluating small molecule therapeutics, biological drugs, adjuvants, and vaccines, completed after January 2006 and before July 2015, including randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies across all clinical phases.ResultsIndustry was more likely than non-profit funders to fund large international randomised controlled trials, although methodological differences have been decreasing with time. Among 27 835 completed efficacy trials (phase II-IV), 15 084 (54.2%) had disclosed their findings publicly. Industry was more likely than non-profit trial funders to disseminate trial results (59.3% (10 444/17 627) v 45.3% (4555/10 066)), and large drug companies had higher disclosure rates than small ones (66.7% (7681/11 508) v 45.2% (2763/6119)). Trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were disseminated more often than those of other non-profit institutions (60.0% (1451/2417) v 40.6% (3104/7649)). Results of studies funded by large drug companies and NIH were more likely to appear on clinicaltrials.gov than were those from non-profit funders, which were published mainly as journal articles. Trials reporting the use of randomisation were more likely than non-randomised studies to be published in a journal article (6895/19 711 (34.9%) v 1408/7748 (18.2%)), and journal publication rates varied across disease areas, ranging from 42% for autoimmune diseases to 20% for oncology.ConclusionsTrial design and dissemination of results vary substantially depending on the type and size of funding institution as well as the disease area under study.

Development of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors for coronary heart disease (CHD) has yet to deliver licensed medicines. To distinguish compound from drug target failure, we compared evidence from clinical trials and drug target Mendelian randomization of CETP protein concentration, comparing this to Mendelian randomization of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9). We show that previous failures of CETP inhibitors are likely compound related, as illustrated by significant degrees of between-compound heterogeneity in effects on lipids, blood pressure, and clinical outcomes observed in trials. On-target CETP inhibition, assessed through Mendelian randomization, is expected to reduce the risk of CHD, heart failure, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, while increasing the risk of age-related macular degeneration. In contrast, lower PCSK9 concentration is anticipated to decrease the risk of CHD, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, multiple sclerosis, and stroke, while potentially increasing the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and asthma. Due to distinct effects on lipoprotein metabolite profiles, joint inhibition of CETP and PCSK9 may provide added benefit. In conclusion, we provide genetic evidence that CETP is an effective target for CHD prevention but with a potential on-target adverse effect on age-related macular degeneration.