Back

An empirical study of sex-stratified vs. sex-combined analysis in the presence of genetic effect heterogeneity

Lin, B.; Sun, L.

2022-06-10 genetics
10.1101/2022.06.08.495202 bioRxiv
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.

50% of probability mass above

"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.