Back

Cascading Epigenomic Model for GWAS

Ng, B.; Casazza, W.; Mostafavi, S.

2019-11-29 bioinformatics
10.1101/859512 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The majority of genetic variants detected in genome wide association studies (GWAS) exert their effects on phenotypes through gene regulation. Motivated by this observation, we propose a multi-omic integration method that models the cascading effects of genetic variants from epigenome to transcriptome and eventually to the phenome in identifying target genes influenced by risk alleles. This cascading epigenomic analysis for GWAS, which we refer to as CEWAS, comprises two types of models: one for linking cis genetic effects to epigenomic variation and another for linking cis epigenomic variation to gene expression. Applying these models in cascade to GWAS summary statistics generates gene level statistics that reflect genetically-driven epigenomic effects. We show on sixteen brain-related GWAS that CEWAS provides higher gene detection rate than related methods, and finds disease relevant genes and gene sets that point toward less explored biological processes. CEWAS thus presents a novel means for exploring the regulatory landscape of GWAS variants in uncovering disease mechanisms. SummaryThe majority of genetic variants detected in genome wide association studies (GWAS) exert their effects on phenotypes through gene regulation. Motivated by this observation, we propose a multi-omic integration method that models the cascading effects of genetic variants from epigenome to transcriptome and eventually to the phenome in identifying target genes influenced by risk alleles. This cascading epigenomic analysis for GWAS, which we refer to as CEWAS, combines the effect of genetic variants on DNA methylation as well as gene expression. We show on sixteen brain-related GWAS that CEWAS provides higher gene detection rate than related methods, and finds disease relevant genes and gene sets that point toward less explored biological processes.

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.