Search for: All records

Abstract Recent advances in genome sequencing and imputation technologies provide an exciting opportunity to comprehensively study the contribution of genetic variants to complex phenotypes. However, our ability to translate genetic discoveries into mechanistic insights remains limited at this point. In this paper, we propose an efficient knockoff-based method, GhostKnockoff, for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) that leads to improved power and ability to prioritize putative causal variants relative to conventional GWAS approaches. The method requires only Z-scores from conventional GWAS and hence can be easily applied to enhance existing and future studies. The method can also be applied to meta-analysis of multiple GWAS allowing for arbitrary sample overlap. We demonstrate its performance using empirical simulations and two applications: (1) a meta-analysis for Alzheimer’s disease comprising nine overlapping large-scale GWAS, whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing studies and (2) analysis of 1403 binary phenotypes from the UK Biobank data in 408,961 samples of European ancestry. Our results demonstrate that GhostKnockoff can identify putatively functional variants with weaker statistical effects that are missed by conventional association tests. 

The statistical practice of modeling interaction with two linear main effects and a product term is ubiquitous in the statistical and epidemiological literature. Most data modelers are aware that the misspecification of main effects can potentially cause severe type I error inflation in tests for interactions, leading to spurious detection of interactions. However, modeling practice has not changed. In this article, we focus on the specific situation where the main effects in the model are misspecified as linear terms and characterize its impact on common tests for statistical interaction. We then propose some simple alternatives that fix the issue of potential type I error inflation in testing interaction due to main effect misspecification. We show that when using the sandwich variance estimator for a linear regression model with a quantitative outcome and two independent factors, both the Wald and score tests asymptotically maintain the correct type I error rate. However, if the independence assumption does not hold or the outcome is binary, using the sandwich estimator does not fix the problem. We further demonstrate that flexibly modeling the main effect under a generalized additive model can largely reduce or often remove bias in the estimates and maintain the correct type I error rate for both quantitative and binary outcomes regardless of the independence assumption. We show, under the independence assumption and for a continuous outcome, overfitting and flexibly modeling the main effects does not lead to power loss asymptotically relative to a correctly specified main effect model. Our simulation study further demonstrates the empirical fact that using flexible models for the main effects does not result in a significant loss of power for testing interaction in general. Our results provide an improved understanding of the strengths and limitations for tests of interaction in the presence of main effect misspecification. Using data from a large biobank study “The Michigan Genomics Initiative”, we present two examples of interaction analysis in support of our results.