ArticleGenetic epidemiology2019
Using Bayes model averaging to leverage both gene main effects and G × E interactions to identify genomic regions in genome-wide association studies.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genome-wide analysis highlights contribution of immune system pathways to the genetic architecture of asthma.Nature communications · 2020Pooled it
- Bayesian Approaches in Exploring Gene-environment and Gene-gene Interactions: A Comprehensive Review.Cancer genomics & proteomics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies typically search for marginal associations between a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and a disease trait while gene-environment (G × E) interactions remain generally unexplored. More powerful methods beyond the simple case-control (CC) approach leverage either marginal effects or CC ascertainment to increase power. However, these potential gains depend on assumptions whose aptness is often unclear a priori. Here, we review G × E methods and use simulations to highlight performance as a function of main and interaction effects and the association of the two factors in the source population. Substantial variation in performance between methods leads to uncertainty as to which approach is most appropriate for any given analysis. We present a framework that (a) balances the robustness of a CC approach with the power of the case-only (CO) approach; (b) incorporates main SNP effects; (c) allows for incorporation of prior information; and (d) allows the data to determine the most appropriate model. Our framework is based on Bayes model averaging, which provides a principled statistical method for incorporating model uncertainty. We average over inclusion of parameters corresponding to the main and G × E interaction effects and the G-E association in controls. The resulting method exploits the joint evidence for main and interaction effects while gaining power from a CO equivalent analysis. Through simulations, we demonstrate that our approach detects SNPs within a wide range of scenarios with increased power over current methods. We illustrate the approach on a gene-environment scan in the USC Children's Health Study.
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.