Search

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified many genetic loci associated with complex traits and diseases in the past 20 years. Multiple heritable covariates may be added into GWAS regression models to estimate direct effects of genetic variants on a focal trait, or to improve the power by accounting for environmental effects and other sources of trait variations. When one or more covariates are causally affected by both genetic variants and hidden confounders, adjusting for them in GWAS will produce biased estimation of SNP effects, known as collider bias. Several approaches have been developed to correct collider bias through estimating the bias by Mendelian randomization (MR). However, these methods work for only one covariate, some of which utilize MR methods with relatively strong assumptions, both of which may not hold in practice. In this paper, we extend the bias-correction approaches in two aspects: first we derive an analytical expression for the collider bias in the presence of multiple covariates, then we propose estimating the bias using a robust multivariable MR (MVMR) method based on constrained maximum likelihood (called MVMR-cML), allowing the presence of invalid instrumental variables (IVs) and correlated pleiotropy. We also established the estimation consistency and asymptotic normality of the new bias-corrected estimator. We conducted simulations to show that all methods mitigated collider bias under various scenarios. In real data analyses, we applied the methods to two GWAS examples, the first a GWAS of waist-hip ratio with adjustment for only one covariate, body-mass index (BMI), and the second a GWAS of BMI adjusting metabolomic principle components as multiple covariates, illustrating the effectiveness of bias correction. Author summary: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are powerful in identifying genetic variants influencing complex traits and diseases. However, adjusting for heritable covariates in GWAS may introduce collider bias when both genetic variants and confounders may causally influence these covariates. In this study, for the first time we derived the analytical form of the bias term in GWAS with multiple covariates, enabling bias estimation and correction using any MVMR method. On the other hand, many existing MVMR methods may not be robust to invalid IVs and are designed for independent samples. Since GWAS data of multiple traits are needed, overlapping samples become inevitable. Hence, while investigating the performance of many MVMR methods, we mainly adopt MVMR-cML, a novel MVMR approach robust to invalid IVs and sample overlap. Our simulations underscore that most MVMR methods effectively reduce collider bias across various scenarios. Furthermore, by accounting for correlations among GWAS statistics, as well as the linkage disequilibrium (LD) between the target SNP and IVs, we establish the consistency and asymptotic normality of the bias-corrected estimator based on MVMR-cML. The application of our bias-correction approach to two published GWAS data examples illustrates its utility and efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Activating Transcription Factor 4 (ATF4) is an important regulator of gene expression in stress responses and developmental processes in many cell types. Here, we catalogued ATF4 binding sites in the human genome and identified overlaps with trait-associated genetic variants. We probed these genetic variants for allelic regulatory activity using a massively parallel reporter assay (MPRA) in HepG2 hepatoma cells exposed to tunicamycin to induce endoplasmic reticulum stress and ATF4 upregulation. The results revealed that in the majority of cases, the MPRA allelic activity of these SNPs was in agreement with the nucleotide preference seen in the ATF4 binding motif from ChIP-Seq. Luciferase and electrophoretic mobility shift assays in additional cellular models further confirmed ATF4-dependent regulatory effects for the SNPs rs532446 (GADD45A intronic; linked to hematological parameters), rs7011846 (LPL upstream; myocardial infarction), rs2718215 (diastolic blood pressure), rs281758 (psychiatric disorders) and rs6491544 (educational attainment). CRISPR-Cas9 disruption and/or deletion of the regulatory elements harboring rs532446 and rs7011846 led to the downregulation of GADD45A and LPL, respectively. Thus, these SNPs could represent examples of GWAS genetic variants that affect gene expression by altering ATF4-mediated transcriptional activation. Author summary: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have gathered a large amount of data connecting genetic variations (mostly single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) to phenotypic traits, including diseases, but the molecular mechanisms through which the SNPs lead to phenotypic effects are often obscure. In this paper, we compiled a whole-genome catalogue of chromatin loci interacting with activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4), an important regulator of gene expression in cellular stress responses and other biological processes, and identified trait-associated SNPs overlapping ATF4 binding motifs. We then evaluated the consequences of more than 500 ATF4 binding motif-altering SNPs on allelic transcriptional activity using a massively parallel reporter assay in hepatoma cells in unstressed and stressful conditions. Further characterization of five selected SNPs in additional cellular models confirmed ATF4-dependent regulatory effects for the SNPs rs532446 (GADD45A intronic; linked to blood cell parameters), rs7011846 (LPL upstream; myocardial infarction), rs2718215 (diastolic blood pressure), rs281758 (psychiatric disorders) and rs6491544 (educational attainment). CRISPR/Cas9 technology was used to confirm the effect of rs532446 region on GADD45A and rs7011846 region on LPL gene expression. In conclusion, the data indicate that allelic variants of rs532446, rs7011846 and several other GWAS trait-linked SNPs located in ATF4 binding motifs differ in the ability to activate ATF4-mediated gene expression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are commonly used to identify genomic variants that are associated with complex traits, and estimate the magnitude of this association for each variant. However, it has been widely observed that the association estimates of variants tend to be lower in a replication study than in the study that discovered those associations. A phenomenon known as Winner's Curse is responsible for this upward bias present in association estimates of significant variants in the discovery study. We review existing Winner's Curse correction methods which require only GWAS summary statistics in order to make adjustments. In addition, we propose modifications to improve existing methods and propose a novel approach which uses the parametric bootstrap. We evaluate and compare methods, first using a wide variety of simulated data sets and then, using real data sets for three different traits. The metric, estimated mean squared error (MSE) over significant SNPs, was primarily used for method assessment. Our results indicate that widely used conditional likelihood based methods tend to perform poorly. The other considered methods behave much more similarly, with our proposed bootstrap method demonstrating very competitive performance. To complement this review, we have developed an R package, 'winnerscurse' which can be used to implement these various Winner's Curse adjustment methods to GWAS summary statistics. Author summary: A genome-wide association study is designed to analyse many common genetic variants in thousands of samples and identify which variants are associated with a trait of interest. It provides estimates of association strength for each variant and variants are classified as associated if their test statistics obtained in the study pass a chosen significance threshold. However, due to a phenomenon known as Winner's Curse, the association estimates of these significant variants tend to be upward biased and greater in magnitude than their true values. Naturally, this bias has adverse consequences for downstream statistical techniques which use these estimates. In this paper, we look at current methods which have been designed to combat Winner's Curse and propose modifications to these methods in order to improve performance. Using a wide variety of simulated data sets as well as real data, we perform a thorough evaluation of these methods. We use a metric which allows us to identify which methods, on average, produce adjusted estimates for significant variants that are closest to the true values. To accompany our work, we have created an R package, 'winnerscurse', which allows users to easily apply Winner's Curse correction methods to their data sets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we review the methodological underpinnings of the general pharmacogenetic approach for uncovering genetically-driven treatment effect heterogeneity. This typically utilises only individuals who are treated and relies on fairly strong baseline assumptions to estimate what we term the 'genetically moderated treatment effect' (GMTE). When these assumptions are seriously violated, we show that a robust but less efficient estimate of the GMTE that incorporates information on the population of untreated individuals can instead be used. In cases of partial violation, we clarify when Mendelian randomization and a modified confounder adjustment method can also yield consistent estimates for the GMTE. A decision framework is then described to decide when a particular estimation strategy is most appropriate and how specific estimators can be combined to further improve efficiency. Triangulation of evidence from different data sources, each with their inherent biases and limitations, is becoming a well established principle for strengthening causal analysis. We call our framework 'Triangulation WIthin a STudy' (TWIST)' in order to emphasise that an analysis in this spirit is also possible within a single data set, using causal estimates that are approximately uncorrelated, but reliant on different sets of assumptions. We illustrate these approaches by re-analysing primary-care-linked UK Biobank data relating to CYP2C19 genetic variants, Clopidogrel use and stroke risk, and data relating to APOE genetic variants, statin use and Coronary Artery Disease. Author summary: Understanding how much a specific treatment's effect is moderated by common genetic variation is an important public health question. If a person's genetics means they will experience a much reduced treatment effect, as measured with respect to a particular health outcome, then they could be switched to an alternative therapy. When assessing the impact of such a switch at the population level, it is typical to only use data on those who are treated with the said drug. However, this analysis is compromised if genetic variants exist which moderate the treatment's effect and affect the outcome through alternative pathways. In this paper we describe an extended analysis framework to estimating the 'genetically moderated treatment effect' (GMTE) that incorporates information on both treated and untreated individuals. With this larger set of information we show that four analysis approaches for estimating the GMTE are possible. Each one relies on a different set of assumptions to work correctly and provides estimates that are largely uncorrelated with one another. Our paper describes a decision framework for triangulating the findings from these four approaches in order to provide a more robust basis for decision making in public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent work, Wang et al introduced the "Sum of Single Effects" (SuSiE) model, and showed that it provides a simple and efficient approach to fine-mapping genetic variants from individual-level data. Here we present new methods for fitting the SuSiE model to summary data, for example to single-SNP z-scores from an association study and linkage disequilibrium (LD) values estimated from a suitable reference panel. To develop these new methods, we first describe a simple, generic strategy for extending any individual-level data method to deal with summary data. The key idea is to replace the usual regression likelihood with an analogous likelihood based on summary data. We show that existing fine-mapping methods such as FINEMAP and CAVIAR also (implicitly) use this strategy, but in different ways, and so this provides a common framework for understanding different methods for fine-mapping. We investigate other common practical issues in fine-mapping with summary data, including problems caused by inconsistencies between the z-scores and LD estimates, and we develop diagnostics to identify these inconsistencies. We also present a new refinement procedure that improves model fits in some data sets, and hence improves overall reliability of the SuSiE fine-mapping results. Detailed evaluations of fine-mapping methods in a range of simulated data sets show that SuSiE applied to summary data is competitive, in both speed and accuracy, with the best available fine-mapping methods for summary data. Author summary: The goal of fine-mapping is to identify the genetic variants that causally affect some trait of interest. Fine-mapping is challenging because the genetic variants can be highly correlated due to a phenomenon called linkage disequilibrium (LD). The most successful current approaches to fine-mapping frame the problem as a variable selection problem, and here we focus on one such approach based on the "Sum of Single Effects" (SuSiE) model. The main contribution of this paper is to extend SuSiE to work with summary data, which is often accessible when the full genotype and phenotype data are not. In the process of extending SuSiE, we developed a new mathematical framework that helps to explain existing fine-mapping methods for summary data, why they work well (or not), and under what circumstances. In simulations, we show that SuSiE applied to summary data is competitive with the best available fine-mapping methods for summary data. We also show how different factors such as accuracy of the LD estimates can affect the quality of the fine-mapping. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mendelian Randomisation (MR) is a powerful tool in epidemiology that can be used to estimate the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome in the presence of unobserved confounding, by utilising genetic variants as instrumental variables (IVs) for the exposure. The effect estimates obtained from MR studies are often interpreted as the lifetime effect of the exposure in question. However, the causal effects of some exposures are thought to vary throughout an individual's lifetime with periods during which an exposure has a greater effect on a particular outcome. Multivariable MR (MVMR) is an extension of MR that allows for multiple, potentially highly related, exposures to be included in an MR estimation. MVMR estimates the direct effect of each exposure on the outcome conditional on all the other exposures included in the estimation. We explore the use of MVMR to estimate the direct effect of a single exposure at different time points in an individual's lifetime on an outcome. We use simulations to illustrate the interpretation of the results from such analyses and the key assumptions required. We show that causal effects at different time periods can be estimated through MVMR when the association between the genetic variants used as instruments and the exposure measured at those time periods varies. However, this estimation will not necessarily identify exact time periods over which an exposure has the most effect on the outcome. Prior knowledge regarding the biological basis of exposure trajectories can help interpretation. We illustrate the method through estimation of the causal effects of childhood and adult BMI on C-Reactive protein and smoking behaviour. Author summary: Mendelian Randomisation (MR) can be used to estimate whether a potential exposure has a causal effect on an outcome in the presence of a third (unobserved) variable that affects both of them and so biases the observed association between them. The effect estimates obtained from MR studies can be interpreted as the effect of the exposure on the outcome over the lifetime. However, for some exposures there may be periods during which the causal effect on an outcome is greater or lesser than other periods. Multivariable MR (MVMR) is an extension of MR that allows for estimation of the causal effect of multiple, potentially highly related, exposures. In this paper we investigate how MVMR can be used to estimate the causal effect of the same exposure at different points across the lifecourse. We show that these effects can be estimated through MVMR when the association between the genetic variants used as instruments and the exposure varies between measurements of the exposures. However, we find that this estimation will not necessarily identify exact time periods over which an exposure has the most effect on the outcome as different periods in the lifecourse can only be separated when they are differently associated with genetic variants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inherited genetic variation contributes to individual risk for many complex diseases and is increasingly being used for predictive patient stratification. Previous work has shown that genetic factors are not equally relevant to human traits across age and other contexts, though the reasons for such variation are not clear. Here, we introduce methods to infer the form of the longitudinal relationship between genetic relative risk for disease and age and to test whether all genetic risk factors behave similarly. We use a proportional hazards model within an interval-based censoring methodology to estimate age-varying individual variant contributions to genetic relative risk for 24 common diseases within the British ancestry subset of UK Biobank, applying a Bayesian clustering approach to group variants by their relative risk profile over age and permutation tests for age dependency and multiplicity of profiles. We find evidence for age-varying relative risk profiles in nine diseases, including hypertension, skin cancer, atherosclerotic heart disease, hypothyroidism and calculus of gallbladder, several of which show evidence, albeit weak, for multiple distinct profiles of genetic relative risk. The predominant pattern shows genetic risk factors having the greatest relative impact on risk of early disease, with a monotonic decrease over time, at least for the majority of variants, although the magnitude and form of the decrease varies among diseases. As a consequence, for diseases where genetic relative risk decreases over age, genetic risk factors have stronger explanatory power among younger populations, compared to older ones. We show that these patterns cannot be explained by a simple model involving the presence of unobserved covariates such as environmental factors. We discuss possible models that can explain our observations and the implications for genetic risk prediction. Author summary: The genes we inherit from our parents influence our risk for almost all diseases, from cancer to severe infections. With the explosion of genomic technologies, we are now able to use an individual's genome to make useful predictions about future disease risk. However, recent work has shown that the predictive value of genetic information varies by context, including age, sex and ethnicity. In this paper we introduce, validate and apply new statistical methods for investigating the relationship between age and the contributions of genetic risk. These methods allow us to ask questions such as whether relative risk is constant over time, precisely how relative risk changes over time and whether all genetic risk factors have similar age profiles. By applying the methods to data from the UK Biobank, a prospective study of 500,000 people, we show that there is a tendency for genetic relative risk to decline with increasing age. We consider a series of possible explanations for the observation and conclude that there must be processes acting that we are currently unaware of, such as distinct phases of life in which genetic risk manifests itself, or interactions between genes and the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All of these animals have a functioning visual system, so how does the operation of the visual circuit change, given twice as many horizontal cells or retinal ganglion cells? Geneticists, or perhaps more accurately genomicists, are used to big science, enormous projects that take years to complete and consume vast sums of money: sequencing mammalian genomes, genotyping a million people, obtaining ever more extensive catalogs of epigenetic marks, and so on. Yet some mouse strains have nearly twice as many horizontal cells or retinal ganglion cells than others; strains with high numbers of cells of one type do not necessarily also have high numbers of the other [[31]]. Entitled "The mind of a mouse", a position paper in Cell described a visionary project to construct the map of the mouse brain down to the level of the synapse, requiring electron microscopy to obtain the necessary resolution [[1]]. [Extracted from the article]

Over a decade of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have led to the finding of extreme polygenicity of complex traits. The phenomenon that "all genes affect every complex trait" complicates Mendelian Randomization (MR) studies, where natural genetic variations are used as instruments to infer the causal effect of heritable risk factors. We reexamine the assumptions of existing MR methods and show how they need to be clarified to allow for pervasive horizontal pleiotropy and heterogeneous effect sizes. We propose a comprehensive framework GRAPPLE to analyze the causal effect of target risk factors with heterogeneous genetic instruments and identify possible pleiotropic patterns from data. By using GWAS summary statistics, GRAPPLE can efficiently use both strong and weak genetic instruments, detect the existence of multiple pleiotropic pathways, determine the causal direction and perform multivariable MR to adjust for confounding risk factors. With GRAPPLE, we analyze the effect of blood lipids, body mass index, and systolic blood pressure on 25 disease outcomes, gaining new information on their causal relationships and the potential pleiotropic pathways. Author summary: Mendelian randomization uses genetic variants related to a modifiable risk factor to obtain evidence regarding its causal influence on disease from observational studies. However, the highly polygenic nature of complex traits where almost all genes contribute to every complex trait challenges the reliability of the causal inference from these genetic variants. In this paper, we give a thorough reexamination of the assumptions that can be reasonably made for Mendelian randomization and propose a framework, GRAPPLE, to gain power by using both strongly and weakly associated SNPs and to identify confounding pleiotropic pathways from hidden risk factors. With GRAPPLE, we analyze the effect of blood lipids, body mass index, and systolic blood pressure on 25 diseases, gaining an improved understanding of these risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]