Power Comparisons of Methods for Joint Association Analysis of Multiple PhenotypesZhu H. · Zhang S. · Sha Q.
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, Mich., USA
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Background/Aims: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified many variants that each affect multiple phenotypes, which suggests that pleiotropic effects on human complex phenotypes may be widespread. Therefore, statistical methods that can jointly analyze multiple phenotypes in GWAS may have advantages over analyzing each phenotype individually. Several statistical methods have been developed to utilize such multivariate phenotypes in genetic association studies; however, the performance of these methods under different scenarios is largely unknown. Our goal was to provide researchers with useful guidelines on selecting statistical methods for the application of real data to multiple phenotypes. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the performance of some of the existing methods for association studies using multiple phenotypes. These methods included the O'Brien method (OB), cross-validation method (CV), optimal weight method (OW), Trait-based Association Test that uses Extended Simes procedure (TATES), principal components of heritability (PCH), canonical correlation analysis (CCA), multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), and a joint model of multiple phenotypes (MultiPhen). We used simulation studies to compare the powers of these methods under a variety of scenarios, including different numbers of phenotypes, different values of between-phenotype correlation, different minor allele frequencies, and different mean and variance models. Results and Conclusion: Our simulation results show that there is no single method with consistently good performance among all the scenarios. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
- Yang Q, Wu H, Guo CY, Fox CS: Analyze multivariate phenotypes in genetic association studies by combining univariate association tests. Genet Epidemiol 2010;34:444-454.
- Gavish B, Ben-Dov IZ, Bursztyn M: Linear relationship between systolic and diastolic blood pressure over 24 h: assessment and correlates. J Hypertens 2008;26:199-209.
- Locke DE, Berry DT, Fakhoury TA, Schmitt FA: Relationship of indicators of neuropathology, psychopathology, and effort to neuropsychological results in patients with epilepsy or psychogenic non-epileptic seizures. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2006;28:325-340.
- Aschard H, Vilhjálmsson BJ, Greliche N, Morange PE, Trégouët DA, Kraft P: Maximizing the power of principal-component analysis of correlated phenotypes in genome-wide association studies. Am J Hum Genet 2014;94:662-676.
- O'Reilly PF, Hoggart CJ, Pomyen Y, Calboli FC, Elliott P, Jarvelin MR, Coin LJ: MultiPhen: joint model of multiple phenotypes can increase discovery in GWAS. PLoS One 2012;7:e34861.
- O'Brien PC: Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. Biometrics 1984;40:1079-1087.
- van der Sluis S, Posthuma D, Dolan CV: TATES: efficient multivariate genotype-phenotype analysis for genome-wide association studies. PLoS Genet 2013;9:e1003235.
- Klei L, Luca D, Devlin B, Roeder K: Pleiotropy and principal components of heritability combine to increase power for association analysis. Genet Epidemiol 2008;32:9-19.
- Ferreira MA, Purcell SM: A multivariate test of association. Bioinformatics 2009;25:132-133.
- Zhou X, Stephens M: Efficient multivariate linear mixed model algorithms for genome-wide association studies. Nat Methods 2014;11:407-409.
- Stephens M: A unified framework for association analysis with multiple related phenotypes. PLoS One 2013;8:e65245.
- Yang Q, Wang Y: Methods for analyzing multivariate phenotypes in genetic association studies. J Probab Stat 2012;2012:652569.
- Solovieff N, Cotsapas C, Lee PH, Purcell SM, Smoller JW: Pleiotropy in complex traits: challenges and strategies. Nat Rev Genet 2013;14:483-495.
- Galesloot TE, van Steen K, Kiemeney LALM, Janss LL, Vermeulen SH: A comparison of multivariate genome-wide association methods. PLoS One 2014;9:e95923.
- Zhu W, Zhang H: Why do we test multiple traits in genetic association studies? J Korean Stat Soc 2009;38:1-10.
- Chavali S, Barrenas F, Kanduri K, Benson M: Network properties of human disease genes with pleiotropic effects. BMC Syst Biol 2010;4:78.
- Lange C, van Steen K, Andrew T, Lyon H, DeMeo DL, Raby B, Murphy A, Silverman EK, MacGregor A, Weiss ST, Laird NM: A family-based association test for repeatedly measured quantitative traits adjusting for unknown environmental and/or polygenic effects. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol 2004;3:Article17.
- Wei LJ, Johnson WE: Combining dependent tests with incomplete repeated measurements. Biometrika 1985;72:359-364.
Lan H, Stoehr JP, Nadler ST, Schueler KL, Yandell BS, Attie AD: Dimension reduction for mapping mRNA abundance as quantitative traits. Genetics 2003;164:1607-1614.
- Wang K, Abbott D: A principal components regression approach to multilocus genetic association studies. Genet Epidemiol 2008;32:108-118.
- Ott J, Rabinowitz D: A principal-components approach based on heritability for combining phenotype information. Hum Hered 1999;49:106-111.
- Hotelling H: Relations between two sets of variates. Biometrika 1936;28:321-377.
- Tang C, Ferreira M: A gene-based test of association using canonical correlation analysis. Bioinformatics 2012;28:845-850.
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.