Interpreting Meta-Analyses of Genome-Wide Association Studies
Meta-analysis is an increasingly popular tool for combining multiple genome-wide association studies in a single analysis to identify associations with small effect sizes. The effect sizes between studies in a meta-analysis may differ and these differences, or heterogeneity, can be caused by many factors. If heterogeneity is observed in the results of a meta-analysis, interpreting the cause of heterogeneity is important because the correct interpretation can lead to a better understanding of the disease and a more effective design of a replication study. However, interpreting heterogeneous results is difficult. The standard approach of examining the association p-values of the studies does not effectively predict if the effect exists in each study. In this paper, we propose a framework facilitating the interpretation of the results of a meta-analysis. Our framework is based on a new statistic representing the posterior probability that the effect exists in each study, which is estimated utilizing cross-study information. Simulations and application to the real data show that our framework can effectively segregate the studies predicted to have an effect, the studies predicted to not have an effect, and the ambiguous studies that are underpowered. In addition to helping interpretation, the new framework also allows us to develop a new association testing procedure taking into account the existence of effect.
Vyšlo v časopise:
Interpreting Meta-Analyses of Genome-Wide Association Studies. PLoS Genet 8(3): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002555
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002555
Souhrn
Meta-analysis is an increasingly popular tool for combining multiple genome-wide association studies in a single analysis to identify associations with small effect sizes. The effect sizes between studies in a meta-analysis may differ and these differences, or heterogeneity, can be caused by many factors. If heterogeneity is observed in the results of a meta-analysis, interpreting the cause of heterogeneity is important because the correct interpretation can lead to a better understanding of the disease and a more effective design of a replication study. However, interpreting heterogeneous results is difficult. The standard approach of examining the association p-values of the studies does not effectively predict if the effect exists in each study. In this paper, we propose a framework facilitating the interpretation of the results of a meta-analysis. Our framework is based on a new statistic representing the posterior probability that the effect exists in each study, which is estimated utilizing cross-study information. Simulations and application to the real data show that our framework can effectively segregate the studies predicted to have an effect, the studies predicted to not have an effect, and the ambiguous studies that are underpowered. In addition to helping interpretation, the new framework also allows us to develop a new association testing procedure taking into account the existence of effect.
Zdroje
1. CochranWG 1954 The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 10 101 129
2. MantelNHaenszelW 1959 Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22 719 48
3. FleissJL 1993 The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 2 121 45
4. HardyJSingletonA 2009 Genomewide association studies and human disease. New England Journal of Medicine 360 1759 1768
5. de BakkerPIWFerreiraMARJiaXNealeBMRaychaudhuriS 2008 Practical aspects of imputation-driven meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Hum Mol Genet 17 R122 8
6. CantorRMLangeKSinsheimerJS 2010 Prioritizing gwas results: A review of statistical methods and recommendations for their application. Am J Hum Genet 86 6 22
7. ZegginiEIoannidisJPA 2009 Meta-analysis in genome-wide association studies. Pharmacoge- nomics 10 191 201
8. BarrettJCClaytonDGConcannonPAkolkarBCooperJD 2009 Genome-wide association study and meta-analysis find that over 40 loci affect risk of type 1 diabetes. Nat Genet 41
9. ZegginiEWeedonMNLindgrenCMFraylingTMElliottKS 2007 Replication of genome- wide association signals in uk samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science 316 1336 41
10. ScottLJMohlkeKLBonnycastleLLWillerCJLiY 2007 A genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in finns detects multiple susceptibility variants. Science 316 1341 5
11. SaxenaRVoightBFLyssenkoVBurttNPde BakkerPIW 2007 Genome-wide association analysis identifies loci for type 2 diabetes and triglyceride levels. Science 316 1331 6
12. ScottLJMugliaPKongXQGuanWFlickingerM 2009 Genome-wide association and meta-analysis of bipolar disorder in individuals of european ancestry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106 7501 6
13. FrankeAMcGovernDPBBarrettJCWangKRadford-SmithGL 2010 Genome-wide meta-analysis increases to 71 the number of confirmed crohn's disease susceptibility loci. Nat Genet 42 1118 25
14. StahlEARaychaudhuriSRemmersEFXieGEyreS 2010 Genome-wide association study meta-analysis identifies seven new rheumatoid arthritis risk loci. Nat Genet 42 508 14
15. DerSimonianRLairdN 1986 Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7 177 88
16. HigginsJPTThompsonSG 2002 Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21 1539 58
17. IoannidisJPAPatsopoulosNAEvangelouE 2007 Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ 335 914 6
18. FieldAP 2003 The problems in using fixed-effects models of meta-analysis on real-world data. Understanding Statistics
19. TangH 2006 Confronting ethnicity-specific disease risk. Nature genetics 38 13
20. BarrosoILuanJWheelerEWhittakerPWassonJ 2008 Population-specific risk of type 2 diabetes conferred by hnf4a p2 promoter variants: a lesson for replication studies. Diabetes 57 3161 5
21. Kim-CohenJCaspiATaylorAWilliamsBNewcombeR 2006 Maoa, maltreatment, and gene-environment interaction predicting children's mental health: new evidence and a meta-analysis. Mol Psychiatry 11 903 913
22. PereiraTVPatsopoulosNASalantiGIoannidisJPA 2009 Discovery properties of genome-wide association signals from cumulatively combined data sets. Am J Epidemiol 170 1197 206
23. HanBEskinE 2011 Random-effects model aimed at discovering associations in meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. American journal of human genetics 88 586 598
24. ZaitlenNEskinE 2010 Imputation aware meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Genet Epidemiol 34 537 42
25. EvangelouEMaraganoreDMIoannidisJPA 2007 Meta-analysis in genome-wide association datasets: strategies and application in parkinson disease. PLoS ONE 2 e196 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000196
26. IoannidisJPA 2008 Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis. J Eval Clin Pract 14 951 7
27. HardyRJThompsonSG 1996 A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects. Statistics in Medicine 15 619 629
28. BiggerstaffBJTweedieRL 1997 Incorporating variability in estimates of heterogeneity in the random effects model in meta-analysis. Stat Med 16 753 68
29. ThompsonSGSharpSJ 1999 Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine 18 2693 2708
30. FarrerLACupplesLAHainesJLHymanBKukullWA 1997 Effects of age, sex, and ethnicity on the association between apolipoprotein e genotype and alzheimer disease. a meta-analysis. apoe and alzheimer disease meta analysis consortium. JAMA 278 1349 56
31. HelgadottirAManolescuAHelgasonAThorleifssonGThorsteinsdottirU 2006 A variant of the gene encoding leukotriene a4 hydrolase confers ethnicity-specific risk of myocardial infarction. Nat Genet 38 68 74
32. CorellaDOrdovasJM 2005 Single nucleotide polymorphisms that inuence lipid metabolism: Interaction with dietary factors. Annu Rev Nutr 25 341 90
33. KleebergerSRPedenD 2005 Gene-environment interactions in asthma and other respiratory diseases. Annu Rev Med 56 383 400
34. CaspiAMoffittTE 2006 Gene-environment interactions in psychiatry: joining forces with neu-roscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 7 583 90
35. StephensMBaldingDJ 2009 Bayesian statistical methods for genetic association studies. Nat Rev Genet 10 681 90
36. MarchiniJHowieBMyersSMcVeanGDonnellyP 2007 A new multipoint method for genome-wide association studies by imputation of genotypes. Nat Genet 39 906 13
37. WassermanL 2004 All of statistics Springer New York
38. HanBKangHMEskinE 2009 Rapid and accurate multiple testing correction and power estimation for millions of correlated markers. PLoS Genet 5 e1000456 doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000456
39. WakefieldJ 2009 Bayes factors for genome-wide association studies: comparison with p-values. Genet Epidemiol 33 79 86
40. ConsortiumWTCC 2007 Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature 447 661 78
Štítky
Genetika Reprodukčná medicínaČlánok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS Genetics
2012 Číslo 3
- Je „freeze-all“ pro všechny? Odborníci na fertilitu diskutovali na virtuálním summitu
- Gynekologové a odborníci na reprodukční medicínu se sejdou na prvním virtuálním summitu
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- PIF4–Mediated Activation of Expression Integrates Temperature into the Auxin Pathway in Regulating Hypocotyl Growth
- Metabolic Profiling of a Mapping Population Exposes New Insights in the Regulation of Seed Metabolism and Seed, Fruit, and Plant Relations
- A Splice Site Variant in the Bovine Gene Compromises Growth and Regulation of the Inflammatory Response
- Comprehensive Research Synopsis and Systematic Meta-Analyses in Parkinson's Disease Genetics: The PDGene Database