An empirical study of sex-stratified vs. sex-combined analysis in the presence of genetic effect heterogeneity
Lin, B.; Sun, L.
Show abstract
The effect of a genetic variant on a complex trait may differ between female and male, and in the presence of such genetic effect heterogeneity, sex-stratified analysis is often used. For example, genetic effects are sex-specific for testosterone levels, and sex-stratified analysis of testosterone in literature provided easy-to-interpret, sex-specific effect size estimates. However, from the perspective of association testing power, sex-stratified analysis may not be the best approach. As sex-specific genetic effect implies SNPxSex interaction effect, jointly testing SNP main and SNPxSex interaction effects may be more powerful than sex-stratified analysis or the standard main-effect testing approach. Moreover, since individual data may be unavailable, it is then of interest to study if the interaction analysis can be derived from sex-stratified summary statistics. We considered several different sex-combined methods and evaluated them through extensive simulation studies. We observed that a) the joint SNP main and SNPxSex interaction analysis is most robust to a wide range of genetic models, and b) this joint interaction testing result can be obtained by quadratically combining sex-stratified summary statistics (i.e. squared sum of the sex-stratified summary statistics). We then reanalysed the testosterone levels of the UK Biobank data using sex-combined interaction analysis, which identified 27 new loci that were missed by the sex-stratified approach and the standard sex-combined analysis. Finally, we provide supporting association evidence for nine new loci, uniquely identified by the sex-combined interaction analysis, from earlier association studies of either testosterone level or steroid biosynthesis pathway where testosterone is synthesized. We thus recommend sex-combined interaction analysis, particularly for traits with known sex differences, for most powerful association testing, then followed by sex-stratified analysis for effect size estimation and interpretation.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- gJLS2: A generalized joint location and scale analysis tool for X-inclusive genome-wide discoveries 96%
- A Multiple-trait Bayesian Variable Selection Regression Method for Integrating Phenotypic Causal Networks in Genome-Wide Association Studies 94%
- Comparing Heritability Estimators under Alternative Structures of Linkage Disequilibrium 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating indirect parental genetic effects on offspring phenotypes using virtual parental genotypes derived from sibling and half sibling pairs 96%
- A robust and adaptive framework for interaction testing in quantitative traits between multiple genetic loci and exposure variables 96%
- A novel statistical framework for meta-analysis of total mediation effect with high dimensional omics mediators in large-scale genomic consortia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Garden of Forking Paths: Reinterpreting Haseman-Elston Regression for a Genotype-by-Environment Model 96%
- Modeling Parent-Specific Genetic Nurture in Families with Missing Parental Genotypes: Application to Birthweight and BMI 94%
- MR-DoC2: bidirectional causal modeling with instrumental variables and data from relatives 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.