GWAS significance thresholds in large cohorts of European ancestry.

IF 3.3 3区 生物学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Genetics Pub Date : 2025-05-08 DOI:10.1093/genetics/iyaf056
Evans K Cheruiyot, Tingyan Yang, Allan F McRae
{"title":"GWAS significance thresholds in large cohorts of European ancestry.","authors":"Evans K Cheruiyot, Tingyan Yang, Allan F McRae","doi":"10.1093/genetics/iyaf056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the P-value threshold of 5.0×10-8 remains the standard for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in humans and other species, it still needs to be updated to reflect the current era of large-scale GWAS, where tens of thousands of sample sizes are used to discover genetic associations at loci with smaller minor allele frequencies. In this study, we used a dataset of 348,501 individuals of European ancestry from the UK Biobank to determine the GWAS thresholds required for multiple testing corrections when considering rare and common variants in additive and dominant GWAS models. Additionally, we employed conditional and joint analysis to quantify the proportion of false significant hits in the GWAS results for 72 traits in the UK Biobank when applying the traditional GWAS cutoff vs our newly proposed P-value thresholds. Overall, the results indicate that the conventional GWAS significance threshold of 5.0×10-8 yields a false-positive rate of between 20% and 30% in GWAS studies that utilize large sample sizes and less common variants. Instead, a more stringent GWAS P-value threshold of 5.0×10-9 is needed when rare variants (with minor allele frequency > 0.1%) are included in the association test for both additive and dominance models within the European ancestry population. However, further validation across diverse datasets and study designs, is needed to evaluate the broader applicability of this proposed threshold.</p>","PeriodicalId":48925,"journal":{"name":"Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12059634/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/iyaf056","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the P-value threshold of 5.0×10-8 remains the standard for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in humans and other species, it still needs to be updated to reflect the current era of large-scale GWAS, where tens of thousands of sample sizes are used to discover genetic associations at loci with smaller minor allele frequencies. In this study, we used a dataset of 348,501 individuals of European ancestry from the UK Biobank to determine the GWAS thresholds required for multiple testing corrections when considering rare and common variants in additive and dominant GWAS models. Additionally, we employed conditional and joint analysis to quantify the proportion of false significant hits in the GWAS results for 72 traits in the UK Biobank when applying the traditional GWAS cutoff vs our newly proposed P-value thresholds. Overall, the results indicate that the conventional GWAS significance threshold of 5.0×10-8 yields a false-positive rate of between 20% and 30% in GWAS studies that utilize large sample sizes and less common variants. Instead, a more stringent GWAS P-value threshold of 5.0×10-9 is needed when rare variants (with minor allele frequency > 0.1%) are included in the association test for both additive and dominance models within the European ancestry population. However, further validation across diverse datasets and study designs, is needed to evaluate the broader applicability of this proposed threshold.

GWAS在欧洲血统大队列中的显著性阈值。
虽然5.0 ×10-8的p值阈值仍然是人类和其他物种全基因组关联研究(GWAS)的标准,但它仍然需要更新以反映当前大规模GWAS的时代,在这个时代,成千上万的样本量被用来发现具有较小等位基因频率的位点的遗传关联。在这项研究中,我们使用了来自UK Biobank的348,501个欧洲血统个体的数据集,以确定在考虑加性和显性GWAS模型中的罕见和常见变异时,多重测试修正所需的GWAS阈值。此外,当应用传统的GWAS截止值与我们新提出的p值阈值时,我们采用条件和联合(COJO)分析来量化英国生物银行中72个性状的GWAS结果中假显著命中的比例。总体而言,结果表明,在使用大样本量和较少常见变异的GWAS研究中,传统的GWAS显著性阈值5.0 ×10-8产生的假阳性率在20%至30%之间。相反,当在欧洲血统人群的加性和显性模型的关联测试中包含罕见变异(等位基因频率较小,为0.1%)时,需要更严格的GWAS p值阈值5.0 ×10-8。然而,需要在不同的数据集和研究设计中进一步验证,以评估该提议阈值的更广泛适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Genetics
Genetics GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.10%
发文量
177
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: GENETICS is published by the Genetics Society of America, a scholarly society that seeks to deepen our understanding of the living world by advancing our understanding of genetics. Since 1916, GENETICS has published high-quality, original research presenting novel findings bearing on genetics and genomics. The journal publishes empirical studies of organisms ranging from microbes to humans, as well as theoretical work. While it has an illustrious history, GENETICS has changed along with the communities it serves: it is not your mentor''s journal. The editors make decisions quickly – in around 30 days – without sacrificing the excellence and scholarship for which the journal has long been known. GENETICS is a peer reviewed, peer-edited journal, with an international reach and increasing visibility and impact. All editorial decisions are made through collaboration of at least two editors who are practicing scientists. GENETICS is constantly innovating: expanded types of content include Reviews, Commentary (current issues of interest to geneticists), Perspectives (historical), Primers (to introduce primary literature into the classroom), Toolbox Reviews, plus YeastBook, FlyBook, and WormBook (coming spring 2016). For particularly time-sensitive results, we publish Communications. As part of our mission to serve our communities, we''ve published thematic collections, including Genomic Selection, Multiparental Populations, Mouse Collaborative Cross, and the Genetics of Sex.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信