Quantification method affects replicability of eQTL analysis, colocalization, and TWAS
Head, S. T.; Bresnahan, S. T.; Cole, N.; Wu, W. H.; Bhattacharya, A.
Show abstract
eQTL mapping and TWAS are widely used to contextualize GWAS, yet the impact of RNA-seq processing choices remains unexplored. We find that RNA-seq quantification method and transcriptomic reference substantially affect eQTL detection and gene expression prediction with significant downstream impact on colocalization and TWAS results. Our findings demonstrate that seemingly minor methodological decisions substantially affect these common analyses, highlighting the need for standardized practices to ensure reproducible genetic association studies.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The molecular basis, genetic control and pleiotropic effects of local gene co-expression 96%
- Haplotype-aware modeling of cis-regulatory effects highlights the gaps remaining in eQTL data 95%
- Shared and distinct molecular effects of regulatory genetic variants provide insight into mechanisms of distal enhancer-promoter communication 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Powerful eQTL mapping through low coverage RNA sequencing 96%
- Multivariate adaptive shrinkage improves cross-population transcriptome prediction for transcriptome-wide association studies in underrepresented populations 95%
- Trait selection strategy in multi-trait GWAS: Boosting SNPs discoverability 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Bayesian model comparison for rare variant association studies 96%
- Enrichment analyses identify shared associations for 25 quantitative traits in over 600,000 individuals from seven diverse ancestries 95%
- Characterization of non-coding variants associated with transcription factor binding through ATAC-seq-defined footprint QTLs in liver 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.