ArticleGenetic epidemiology2015
Fine-mapping additive and dominant SNP effects using group-LASSO and fractional resample model averaging.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- BEATRICE: Bayesian fine-mapping from summary data using deep variational inference.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- BEATRICE: Bayesian Fine-mapping from Summary Data using Deep Variational Inference.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Genetic variations in relation to bleeding and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran in Chinese patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A nationwide multicentre prospective cohort study.Clinical and translational medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- A Bayesian model selection approach to mediation analysis.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- SNP and Haplotype Interaction Models Reveal Association of Surfactant Protein Gene Polymorphisms With Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis of Mexican Population.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- ComPaSS-GWAS: A method to reduce type I error in genome-wide association studies when replication data are not available.Genetic epidemiology · 2019Article
- An approximate Bayesian significance test for genomic evaluations.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2018Article
- Bayesian Diallel Analysis RevealsG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2018Article
- Genetic Fine-Mapping and Identification of Candidate Genes and Variants for Adiposity Traits in Outbred Rats.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2018Article
- Genome-Wide Association Study Implicates Atrial Natriuretic Peptide Rather Than B-Type Natriuretic Peptide in the Regulation of Blood Pressure in the General Population.Circulation. Cardiovascular genetics · 2017Article
- Genetic Variant Selection: Learning Across Traits and Sites.Genetics · 2016Article
- A permutation approach for selecting the penalty parameter in penalized model selection.Biometrics · 2015Article
- Sparse Spectro-Temporal Receptive Fields Based on Multi-Unit and High-Gamma Responses in Human Auditory Cortex.PloS one · 2015Article
- The Current and Future Use of Ridge Regression for Prediction in Quantitative Genetics.BioMed research international · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomewide association studies (GWAS) sometimes identify loci at which both the number and identities of the underlying causal variants are ambiguous. In such cases, statistical methods that model effects of multiple single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) simultaneously can help disentangle the observed patterns of association and provide information about how those SNPs could be prioritized for follow-up studies. Current multi-SNP methods, however, tend to assume that SNP effects are well captured by additive genetics; yet when genetic dominance is present, this assumption translates to reduced power and faulty prioritizations. We describe a statistical procedure for prioritizing SNPs at GWAS loci that efficiently models both additive and dominance effects. Our method, LLARRMA-dawg, combines a group LASSO procedure for sparse modeling of multiple SNP effects with a resampling procedure based on fractional observation weights. It estimates for each SNP the robustness of association with the phenotype both to sampling variation and to competing explanations from other SNPs. In producing an SNP prioritization that best identifies underlying true signals, we show the following: our method easily outperforms a single-marker analysis; when additive-only signals are present, our joint model for additive and dominance is equivalent to or only slightly less powerful than modeling additive-only effects; and when dominance signals are present, even in combination with substantial additive effects, our joint model is unequivocally more powerful than a model assuming additivity. We also describe how performance can be improved through calibrated randomized penalization, and discuss how dominance in ungenotyped SNPs can be incorporated through either heterozygote dosage or multiple imputation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.