Back

Efficient meta-analysis of multivariate genome-wide association studies with Meta-MOSTest

Lin, A.; shadrin, a.; van der Meer, D.; Hindley, G.; Cheng, W.; Sonderby, I. E.; Bahrami, S.; S OConnell, K.; Rahman, Z.; Parker, N.; B Smeland, O.; Fan, C.; Holland, D.; Dale, A.; Andreassen, O.; Frei, O.

2022-08-18 bioinformatics
10.1101/2022.08.18.504383 bioRxiv
Show abstract

MotivationGenome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been successful in identifying genetic variants associated with a particular phenotype. However, many complex phenotypes are influenced by multiple genetic variants with small effects. Detecting the genetic pleiotropy can provide insights into biological mechanisms influencing complex human phenotypes. The recently developed Multivariate Omnibus Statistical Test (MOSTest) has proven to be efficient and powerful, suited for complex large-scale data. The method substantially increased discovery of genetic variants associated with brain MRI phenotypes in the UK Biobank compared to conventionally use multivariate approach. Here we extend the MOSTest to meta-analysis (Meta-MOSTest), facilitating data analysis of multiple phenotypes across multiple cohorts. We evaluated our updated approach in the UK Biobank using brain MRI phenotypes, by comparing the discovery yield of the single-cohort MOSTest versus Meta-MOSTest through simulating sub-cohorts of different sample sizes from 265 to 26501 subjects. ResultsOur method works efficiently on large-scale cohorts with a large number of MRI phenotypes. We found that lower per-cohort sample sizes resulted in a reduced discovery yield indicating a loss of statistical power. However, with a minimum sample size of 250 subjects across cohorts, Meta-MOSTest was equivalent to MOSTest on discovery yield while maintaining a well-calibrated type I error and equivalent statistical power. We conclude that Meta-MOSTest is a useful tool for multivariate analysis across separate brain imaging genetics cohorts. Availability and implementationAll codes are freely available on GitHub: MOSTest and Meta-MOSTest.

Matching journals

The top 6 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.