Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35907789›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2022

fcfdr: an R package to leverage continuous and binary functional genomic data in GWAS.

Anna Hutchinson, James Liley, Chris Wallace

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anna HutchinsonMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
James LileyMRC Human Genetics Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Chris WallaceMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. cew54@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9755-1703

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/R511870/1Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/T001569/1Medical Research Council MC UU 00002/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/4Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT220788
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenome-wide association studies (GWAS) are limited in power to detect associations that exceed the stringent genome-wide significance threshold. This limitation can be alleviated by leveraging relevant auxiliary data, such as functional genomic data. Frameworks utilising the conditional false discovery rate have been developed for this purpose, and have been shown to increase power for GWAS discovery whilst controlling the false discovery rate. However, the methods are currently only applicable for continuous auxiliary data and cannot be used to leverage auxiliary data with a binary representation, such as whether SNPs are synonymous or non-synonymous, or whether they reside in regions of the genome with specific activity states.

resultsWe describe an extension to the cFDR framework for binary auxiliary data, called "Binary cFDR". We demonstrate FDR control of our method using detailed simulations, and show that Binary cFDR performs better than a comparator method in terms of sensitivity and FDR control. We introduce an all-encompassing user-oriented CRAN R package ( https://annahutch.github.io/fcfdr/ ; https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/fcfdr/index.html ) and demonstrate its utility in an application to type 1 diabetes, where we identify additional genetic associations.

conclusionsOur all-encompassing R package, fcfdr, serves as a comprehensive toolkit to unite GWAS and functional genomic data in order to increase statistical power to detect genetic associations.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1Genome-Wide Association StudyGenomeGenomicsHumansPolymorphism, Single NucleotideFDRFunctional genomicsGWASMultiple testingPower

Identifiers

PMID35907789
PMCPMC9338519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.