Search for: All records

Mendelian Randomization (MR) has emerged as a powerful approach to leverage genetic instruments to infer causality between pairs of traits in observational studies. However, the results of such studies are susceptible to biases due to weak instruments as well as the confounding effects of population stratification and horizontal pleiotropy. Here, we show that family data can be leveraged to design MR tests that are provably robust to confounding from population stratification, assortative mating, and dynastic effects. We demonstrate in simulations that our approach, MR-Twin, is robust to confounding from population stratification and is not affected by weak instrument bias, while standard MR methods yield inflated false positive rates. We then conducted an exploratory analysis of MR-Twin and other MR methods applied to 121 trait pairs in the UK Biobank dataset. Our results suggest that confounding from population stratification can lead to false positives for existing MR methods, while MR-Twin is immune to this type of confounding, and that MR-Twin can help assess whether traditional approaches may be inflated due to confounding from population stratification. 

We introduce pleiotropic association test (PAT) for joint analysis of multiple traits using genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics. The method utilizes the decomposition of phenotypic covariation into genetic and environmental components to create a likelihood ratio test statistic for each genetic variant. Though PAT does not directly interpret which trait(s) drive the association, a per trait interpretation of the omnibus p-value is provided through an extension to the meta-analysis framework, m-values. In simulations, we show PAT controls the false positive rate, increases statistical power, and is robust to model misspecifications of genetic effect.

Additionally, simulations comparing PAT to three multi-trait methods, HIPO, MTAG, and ASSET, show PAT identified 15.3% more omnibus associations over the next best method. When these associations were interpreted on a per trait level using m-values, PAT had 37.5% more true per trait interpretations with a 0.92% false positive assignment rate. When analyzing four traits from the UK Biobank, PAT discovered 22,095 novel variants. Through the m-values interpretation framework, the number of per trait associations for two traits were almost tripled and were nearly doubled for another trait relative to the original single trait GWAS.

 

Abstract Mendelian Randomization (MR) studies are threatened by population stratification, batch effects, and horizontal pleiotropy. Although a variety of methods have been proposed to mitigate those problems, residual biases may still remain, leading to highly statistically significant false positives in large databases. Here we describe a suite of sensitivity analysis tools that enables investigators to quantify the robustness of their findings against such validity threats. Specifically, we propose the routine reporting of sensitivity statistics that reveal the minimal strength of violations necessary to explain away the MR results. We further provide intuitive displays of the robustness of the MR estimate to any degree of violation, and formal bounds on the worst-case bias caused by violations multiple times stronger than observed variables. We demonstrate how these tools can aid researchers in distinguishing robust from fragile findings by examining the effect of body mass index on diastolic blood pressure and Townsend deprivation index. 

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified thousands of genetic variants associated with complex human traits, but only a fraction of variants identified in discovery studies achieve significance in replication studies. Replication in genome-wide association studies has been well-studied in the context of Winner’s Curse, which is the inflation of effect size estimates for significant variants due to statistical chance. However, Winner’s Curse is often not sufficient to explain lack of replication. Another reason why studies fail to replicate is that there are fundamental differences between the discovery and replication studies. A confounding factor can create the appearance of a significant finding while actually being an artifact that will not replicate in future studies. We propose a statistical framework that utilizes genome-wide association studies and replication studies to jointly model Winner’s Curse and study-specific heterogeneity due to confounding factors. We apply this framework to 100 genome-wide association studies from the Human Genome-Wide Association Studies Catalog and observe that there is a large range in the level of estimated confounding. We demonstrate how this framework can be used to distinguish when studies fail to replicate due to statistical noise and when they fail due to confounding.

 

RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has become an exemplary technology in modern biology and clinical science. Its immense popularity is due in large part to the continuous efforts of the bioinformatics community to develop accurate and scalable computational tools to analyze the enormous amounts of transcriptomic data that it produces. RNA-seq analysis enables genes and their corresponding transcripts to be probed for a variety of purposes, such as detecting novel exons or whole transcripts, assessing expression of genes and alternative transcripts, and studying alternative splicing structure. It can be a challenge, however, to obtain meaningful biological signals from raw RNA-seq data because of the enormous scale of the data as well as the inherent limitations of different sequencing technologies, such as amplification bias or biases of library preparation . The need to overcome these technical challenges has pushed the rapid development of novel computational tools, which have evolved and diversified in accordance with technological advancements, leading to the current myriad of RNA-seq tools. These tools, combined with the diverse computational skill sets of biomedical researchers, help to unlock the full potential of RNA-seq. The purpose of this review is to explain basic concepts in the computational analysis of RNA-seq data and define discipline-specific jargon. 

Abstract In standard genome-wide association studies (GWAS), the standard association test is underpowered to detect associations between loci with multiple causal variants with small effect sizes. We propose a statistical method, Model-based Association test Reflecting causal Status (MARS), that finds associations between variants in risk loci and a phenotype, considering the causal status of variants, only requiring the existing summary statistics to detect associated risk loci. Utilizing extensive simulated data and real data, we show that MARS increases the power of detecting true associated risk loci compared to previous approaches that consider multiple variants, while controlling the type I error. 

Recruiting, training and retaining scientists in computational biology is necessary to develop a workforce that can lead the quantitative biology revolution. Yet, African-American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Native Americans, and women are severely underrepresented in computational biosciences. We established the UCLA Bruins-in-Genomics Summer Research Program to provide training and research experiences in quantitative biology and bioinformatics to undergraduate students with an emphasis on students from backgrounds underrepresented in computational biology. Program assessment was based on number of applicants, alumni surveys and comparison of post-graduate educational choices for participants and a control group of students who were accepted but declined to participate. We hypothesized that participation in the Bruins-in-Genomics program would increase the likelihood that students would pursue post-graduate education in a related field. Our surveys revealed that 75% of Bruins-in-Genomics Summer participants were enrolled in graduate school. Logistic regression analysis revealed that women who participated in the program were significantly more likely to pursue a Ph.D. than a matched control group (group x woman interaction term of p = 0 . 005 ). The Bruins-in-Genomics Summer program represents an example of how a combined didactic-research program structure can make computational biology accessible to a wide range of undergraduates and increase participation in quantitative biosciences. 

Increasingly large Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) have yielded numerous variants associated with many complex traits, motivating the development of “fine mapping” methods to identify which of the associated variants are causal. Additionally, GWAS of the same trait for different populations are increasingly available, raising the possibility of refining fine mapping results further by leveraging different linkage disequilibrium (LD) structures across studies. Here, we introduce multiple study causal variants identification in associated regions (MsCAVIAR), a method that extends the popular CAVIAR fine mapping framework to a multiple study setting using a random effects model. MsCAVIAR only requires summary statistics and LD as input, accounts for uncertainty in association statistics using a multivariate normal model, allows for multiple causal variants at a locus, and explicitly models the possibility of different SNP effect sizes in different populations. We demonstrate the efficacy of MsCAVIAR in both a simulation study and a trans-ethnic, trans-biobank fine mapping analysis of High Density Lipoprotein (HDL). 

Advances in whole-genome sequencing (WGS) promise to enable the accurate and comprehensive structural variant (SV) discovery. Dissecting SVs from WGS data presents a substantial number of challenges and a plethora of SV detection methods have been developed. Currently, evidence that investigators can use to select appropriate SV detection tools is lacking. In this article, we have evaluated the performance of SV detection tools on mouse and human WGS data using a comprehensive polymerase chain reaction-confirmed gold standard set of SVs and the genome-in-a-bottle variant set, respectively. In contrast to the previous benchmarking studies, our gold standard dataset included a complete set of SVs allowing us to report both precision and sensitivity rates of the SV detection methods. Our study investigates the ability of the methods to detect deletions, thus providing an optimistic estimate of SV detection performance as the SV detection methods that fail to detect deletions are likely to miss more complex SVs. We found that SV detection tools varied widely in their performance, with several methods providing a good balance between sensitivity and precision. Additionally, we have determined the SV callers best suited for low- and ultralow-pass sequencing data as well as for different deletion length categories.