ArticleNature genetics2026
High false sign rates in transcriptome-wide association studies.
Article in Nature genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) are widely used to identify genes involved in complex traits and to infer the direction of gene effects on traits. However, despite their popularity, it remains unclear how accurately TWAS recover the true direction of a gene's effect on a trait. Here we estimate the false sign rate of TWAS for plasma proteins, leveraging the expectation that increased gene expression should generally increase protein expression. We then extend this framework to complex traits, where loss-of-function burden tests provide the expected direction of effect. In both analyses, we observe high discordance with expectations, with TWAS showing a false sign rate of 23% for plasma proteins and 33% for complex traits. We propose that much of the sign discordance arises when expression quantitative trait loci in non-trait-relevant tissues tag haplotypes associated with traits in genome-wide association studies via distinct, tightly linked regulatory variants, yielding spurious TWAS associations with the correct genes but with unreliable direction of effect. These findings show that TWAS-based direction-of-effect estimates should be interpreted with caution and raise concerns about the reliability of TWAS more broadly.
Identifiers
42918898What 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.