Imaging-wide association study: Integrating imaging endophenotypes in GWAS

Initiative³

2019

Genetic Epidemiology

Self Cite

The methodology of transcriptome‐wide association studies (TWAS) has become popular in integrating a reference expression quantitative trait (eQTL) data set with an independent main GWAS data set to identify (putatively) causal genes, shedding mechanistic insights to biological pathways from genetic variants to a GWAS trait mediated by gene expression. Statistically TWAS is a (two‐sample) 2‐stage least squares (2SLS) method in the framework of instrumental variables analysis for causal inference: in Stage 1 it uses the reference eQTL data to impute a genes expression for the main GWAS data, then in Stage 2 it tests for association between the imputed gene expression and the GWAS trait; if an association is detected in Stage 2, a (putatively) causal relationship between the gene and the GWAS trait is claimed. If a nonlinear model or a generalized linear model (GLM) is fitted in Stage 2 (e.g., for a binary GWAS trait), it is known that using only imputed gene expression, as in standard TWAS, in general does not lead to a consistent (i.e., asymptotically unbiased) estimate for the causal effect; accordingly, a variation of 2SLS, called two‐stage residual inclusion (2SRI), has been proposed to yield better estimates (e.g., being consistent under suitable conditions). Our main goal is to investigate whether it is necessary or even better to apply 2SRI, instead of the standard 2SLS. In addition, due to the use of imputed gene expression (i.e., with measurement errors), it is known that in general some correction to the standard error estimate of the causal effect estimate has to be applied, while in the standard TWAS no correction is applied. Is this an issue? We also compare one‐sample 2SLS with two‐sample 2SLS (i.e., the standard TWAS). We used the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) data and simulated data mimicking the ADNI data to address the above questions. At the end, we conclude that, in practice with the large sample sizes and small effect sizes of genetic variants, the standard TWAS performs well and is recommended.

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some statistical consideration in transcriptome‐wide association studies

Xue

Initiative³

2019

Genetic Epidemiology

Self Cite

“…We expect that applying our proposed and other integrative methods like TWAS to other existing GWAS data may identify more novel associations and shed more light on the underlying biological mechanisms. We note that our proposed methodology can be applied with other endophenotype‐derived weights (Xu, Wu, Pan, & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, ) or even without weights (i.e., all SNPs with an equal weight).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating eQTL data with GWAS summary statistics in pathway‐based analysis with application to schizophrenia

2018

Genetic Epidemiology

Self Cite

Many genetic variants affect complex traits through gene expression, which can be exploited to boost statistical power and enhance interpretation in genome-wide association studies (GWASs) as demonstrated by the transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) approach. Furthermore, due to polygenic inheritance, a complex trait is often affected by multiple genes with similar functions as annotated in gene pathways. Here, we extend TWAS from gene-based analysis to pathway-based analysis: we integrate public pathway collections, expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) data and GWAS summary association statistics (or GWAS individual-level data) to identify gene pathways associated with complex traits. The basic idea is to weight the SNPs of the genes in a pathway based on their estimated cis-effects on gene expression, then adaptively test for association of the pathway with a GWAS trait by effectively aggregating possibly weak association signals across the genes in the pathway. The P values can be calculated analytically and thus fast. We applied our proposed test with the KEGG and GO pathways to two schizophrenia (SCZ) GWAS summary association data sets, denoted by SCZ1 and SCZ2 with about 20,000 and 150,000 subjects, respectively. Most of the significant pathways identified by analyzing the SCZ1 data were reproduced by the SCZ2 data. Importantly, we identified 15 novel pathways associated with SCZ, such as GABA receptor complex (GO:1902710), which could not be uncovered by the standard single SNP-based analysis or gene-based TWAS. The newly identified pathways may help us gain insights into the biological mechanism underlying SCZ. Our results showcase the power of incorporating gene expression information and gene functional annotations into pathway-based association testing for GWAS.

“…We emphasize that our main conclusion (that the standard TWAS performs well) holds only under the conditions with the large sample size and small effect sizes of genetic variants on complex traits and common diseases. Otherwise, for example, in extensions of TWAS to molecular traits or other endophenotypes (Xu, Wu, Wei, Pan & Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, 2017b; Wu et al, 2018), on which genetic variants (or other IVs) may have much larger effect sizes, cautions should be taken: 2SPS as adopted in the standard TWAS may not be even consistent for a non-linear model in Stage 2.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some Statistical Consideration in Transcriptome-Wide Association Studies

Xue

2019

Preprint

Self Cite

Transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) has become popular in integrating a reference eQTL dataset with an independent main GWAS dataset to identify (putatively) causal genes, shedding mechanistic insights to biological pathways from genetic variants to a GWAS trait mediated by gene expression. Statistically TWAS is a (two-sample) 2-stage least squares (2SLS) method in the framework of instrumental variables analysis for causal inference: in Stage 1 it uses the reference eQTL data to impute a gene’s expression for the main GWAS data, then in Stage 2 it tests for association between the imputed gene expression and the GWAS trait; if an association is detected in Stage 2, a (putatively) causal relationship between the gene and the GWAS trait is claimed. If a non-linear model or a generalized linear model (GLM) is fitted in Stage 2 (e.g. for a binary GWAS trait), it is known that using only imputed gene expression, as in standard TWAS, in general does not lead to a consistent (i.e. asymptotically unbiased) estimate for the causal effect; accordingly, a variation of 2SLS, called two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI), has been proposed to yield better estimates (e.g. being consistent under suitable conditions). Our main goal is to investigate whether it is necessary or even better to apply 2SRI, instead of the standard 2SLS. In addition, due to the use of imputed gene expression (i.e. with measurement errors), it is known that in general some correction to the standard error estimate of the causal effect estimate has to be applied, while in the standard TWAS no correction is applied. Is this an issue? We also compare one-sample 2SLS with two-sample 2SLS (i.e. the standard TWAS). We used the ADNI data and simulated data mimicking the ADNI data to address the above questions. At the end, we conclude that, in practice with the large sample sizes and small effect sizes of genetic variants, the standard TWAS performs well and is recommended.