Christiaan de Leeuw, Josefin Werme, Jeanne E Savage, Wouter J Peyrot, Danielle Posthuma
{"title":"关于转录组广泛关联研究的解释。","authors":"Christiaan de Leeuw, Josefin Werme, Jeanne E Savage, Wouter J Peyrot, Danielle Posthuma","doi":"10.1371/journal.pgen.1010921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) aim to detect relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, and are commonly used for secondary analysis of genome-wide association study (GWAS) results. Results from TWAS analyses are often interpreted as indicating a genetic relationship between gene expression and a phenotype, but this interpretation is not consistent with the null hypothesis that is evaluated in the traditional TWAS framework. In this study we provide a mathematical outline of this TWAS framework, and elucidate what interpretations are warranted given the null hypothesis it actually tests. We then use both simulations and real data analysis to assess the implications of misinterpreting TWAS results as indicative of a genetic relationship between gene expression and the phenotype. Our simulation results show considerably inflated type 1 error rates for TWAS when interpreted this way, with 41% of significant TWAS associations detected in the real data analysis found to have insufficient statistical evidence to infer such a relationship. This demonstrates that in current implementations, TWAS cannot reliably be used to investigate genetic relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, but that local genetic correlation analysis can serve as a potential alternative.</p>","PeriodicalId":20266,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Genetics","volume":"19 9","pages":"e1010921"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508613/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the interpretation of transcriptome-wide association studies.\",\"authors\":\"Christiaan de Leeuw, Josefin Werme, Jeanne E Savage, Wouter J Peyrot, Danielle Posthuma\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pgen.1010921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) aim to detect relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, and are commonly used for secondary analysis of genome-wide association study (GWAS) results. Results from TWAS analyses are often interpreted as indicating a genetic relationship between gene expression and a phenotype, but this interpretation is not consistent with the null hypothesis that is evaluated in the traditional TWAS framework. In this study we provide a mathematical outline of this TWAS framework, and elucidate what interpretations are warranted given the null hypothesis it actually tests. We then use both simulations and real data analysis to assess the implications of misinterpreting TWAS results as indicative of a genetic relationship between gene expression and the phenotype. Our simulation results show considerably inflated type 1 error rates for TWAS when interpreted this way, with 41% of significant TWAS associations detected in the real data analysis found to have insufficient statistical evidence to infer such a relationship. This demonstrates that in current implementations, TWAS cannot reliably be used to investigate genetic relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, but that local genetic correlation analysis can serve as a potential alternative.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Genetics\",\"volume\":\"19 9\",\"pages\":\"e1010921\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508613/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1010921\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1010921","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
On the interpretation of transcriptome-wide association studies.
Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) aim to detect relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, and are commonly used for secondary analysis of genome-wide association study (GWAS) results. Results from TWAS analyses are often interpreted as indicating a genetic relationship between gene expression and a phenotype, but this interpretation is not consistent with the null hypothesis that is evaluated in the traditional TWAS framework. In this study we provide a mathematical outline of this TWAS framework, and elucidate what interpretations are warranted given the null hypothesis it actually tests. We then use both simulations and real data analysis to assess the implications of misinterpreting TWAS results as indicative of a genetic relationship between gene expression and the phenotype. Our simulation results show considerably inflated type 1 error rates for TWAS when interpreted this way, with 41% of significant TWAS associations detected in the real data analysis found to have insufficient statistical evidence to infer such a relationship. This demonstrates that in current implementations, TWAS cannot reliably be used to investigate genetic relationships between gene expression and a phenotype, but that local genetic correlation analysis can serve as a potential alternative.
期刊介绍:
PLOS Genetics is run by an international Editorial Board, headed by the Editors-in-Chief, Greg Barsh (HudsonAlpha Institute of Biotechnology, and Stanford University School of Medicine) and Greg Copenhaver (The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill).
Articles published in PLOS Genetics are archived in PubMed Central and cited in PubMed.