ArticleGenetic epidemiology2025
Fine-Mapping the Results From Genome-Wide Association Studies of Primary Biliary Cholangitis Using SuSiE and h2-D2.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A segregating PTK2B variant in a primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) family induces PBC-like autoimmune features in knock-in mice.Cell & bioscience · 2026Article
- Towards improved fine-mapping of candidate causal variants.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main goal of fine-mapping is the identification of relevant genetic variants that have a causal effect on some trait of interest, such as the presence of a disease. From a statistical point of view, fine mapping can be seen as a variable selection problem. Fine-mapping methods are often challenging to apply because of the presence of linkage disequilibrium (LD), that is, regions of the genome where the variants interrogated have high correlation. Several methods have been proposed to address this issue. Here we explore the 'Sum of Single Effects' (SuSiE) method, applied to real data (summary statistics) from a genome-wide meta-analysis of the autoimmune liver disease primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). Fine-mapping in this data set was previously performed using the FINEMAP program; we compare these previous results with those obtained from SuSiE, which provides an arguably more convenient and principled way of generating 'credible sets', that is set of predictors that are correlated with the response variable. This allows us to appropriately acknowledge the uncertainty when selecting the causal effects for the trait. We focus on the results from SuSiE-RSS, which fits the SuSiE model to summary statistics, such as z-scores, along with a correlation matrix. We also compare the SuSiE results to those obtained using a more recently developed method, h2-D2, which uses the same inputs. Overall, we find the results from SuSiE-RSS and, to a lesser extent, h2-D2, to be quite concordant with those previously obtained using FINEMAP. The resulting genes and biological pathways implicated are therefore also similar to those previously obtained, providing valuable confirmation of these previously reported results. Detailed examination of the credible sets identified suggests that, although for the majority of the loci (33 out of 56) the results from SuSiE-RSS seem most plausible, there are some loci (5 out of 56 loci) where the results from h2-D2 seem more compelling. Computer simulations suggest that, overall, SuSiE-RSS generally has slightly higher power, better precision, and better ability to identify the true number of causal variants in a region than h2-D2, although there are some scenarios where the power of h2-D2 is higher. Thus, in real data analysis, the use of complementary approaches such as both SuSiE and h2-D2 is potentially warranted.
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.