Large Impact of Genetic Data Processing Steps on Stability and Reproducibility of Set-Based Analyses in Genome-Wide Association Studies
Kui, N.; Yu, Y.; Choi, J.; McCaw, Z. R.; Li, X.; Huff, C.; Sun, R.
Show abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are crucial to human genetics research, yet their stability and reproducibility are often questioned. This work describes, analyzes, and provides tools for overcoming reproducibility challenges in two highly popular components of GWAS: set-based (a) hypothesis testing and (b) effect size estimation. Specifically, we focus on how the set-based natures of (a) and (b) often fuel non-reproducible results due to differences in data processing pipelines that are rarely discussed. First, we describe the processing challenges in a statistical model misspecification framework. Second, we analytically calculate the differences in power and amounts of bias that can arise in (a) and (b), respectively, due to small data processing choices. Third, we provide tools for quantifying and avoiding the data processing obstacles in GWAS. We validate our analytical calculations through a simulation study, and we demonstrate the aforementioned challenges empirically through analysis of a whole-exome sequencing study of pancreatic cancer. Author SummaryThe lack of reproducibility and stability in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been widely reported. Here, we demonstrate how such reproducibility challenges arise in a common component of GWAS, set-based hypothesis testing and estimation studies. Specifically, we show how minor, seemingly harmless decisions in how scientists prepare their data can lead to major differences in the final conclusions. These data processing steps are rarely reported in detail, further obscuring their importance. Our work precisely measures the impact of data processing steps on power and bias of common modeling approaches. As a partial solution for future GWAS, we also provide an R software package to interact with our results, which can be used to assess the impact of choices at the design stage of GWAS studies. We further analyze a pancreatic cancer dataset using two modern pipelines and show how the pipelines produce very different results for ATM, a gene that has been previously linked with pancreatic cancer. Using the tools provided by this work can help significantly improve the reproducibility and stability of set-based results, enhancing the translational potential of GWAS investigations.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Accurate modeling of replication rates in genome-wide association studies by accounting for winner's curse and study-specific heterogeneity 95%
- Estimating the effective sample size in association studies of quantitative traits 95%
- Efficient approaches for large scale GWAS studies with genotype uncertainty 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- TWO-SIGMA: a novel TWO-component SInGle cell Model-based Association method for single-cell RNA-seq data 96%
- Assumptions about frequency-dependent architectures of complex traits bias measures of functional enrichment 96%
- Statistics to prioritize rare variants in family-based sequencing studies with disease subtypes 95%
"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.