Correcting for cell-type effects in DNA methylation studies: Reference-based method outperforms latent variable approaches in empirical studies

Genome Biology

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Hattab, Mohammad W ^a   Shabalin, Andrey A ^a   Clark, Shaunna L ^a   Zhao, Min ^a   Kumar, Gaurav ^a   Chan, Robin F ^a   Xie, Lin Ying ^a   Jansen, Rick ^b   Han, Laura K M ^b   Magnusson, Patrik K E ^c   van Grootheest, Gerard ^b   Hultman, Christina M ^c   Penninx, Brenda W J H ^b   Aberg, Karolina A ^a   van den Oord, Edwin J C G ^a  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL ISOLATION; CELL POPULATION; CELL SELECTION; CELLS BY BODY ANATOMY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CPG ISLAND; DEPRESSION; DNA METHYLATION; DNA METHYLATION ASSAY; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; LETTER; METHYL-CPG-BINDING DOMAIN; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; REFERENCE BASED CORRECTION METHOD; SCHIZOPHRENIA; SIMULATION; SURROGATE VARIABLE ANALYSIS;

DNA METHYLATION;

EID: 85011097316     PISSN: 14747596     EISSN: 1474760X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-017-1148-8     Document Type: Letter

References (9)

1. Houseman EA, Accomando WP, Koestler DC, Christensen BC, Marsit CJ, Nelson HH, et al. DNA methylation arrays as surrogate measures of cell mixture distribution. BMC Bioinformatics. 2012;13:86.
2. McGregor K, Bernatsky S, Colmegna I, Hudson M, Pastinen T, Labbe A, et al. An evaluation of methods correcting for cell-type heterogeneity in DNA methylation studies. Genome Biol. 2016;17:84.
3. Leek JT, Storey JD. Capturing heterogeneity in gene expression studies by surrogate variable analysis. PLoS Genet. 2007;3:1724-35.
4. Penninx BW, Beekman AT, Smit JH, Zitman FG, Nolen WA, Spinhoven P, et al. The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA): rationales, objectives and methods. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2008;17:121-40.
5. Ripke S, O'Dushlaine C, Chambert K, Moran JL, Kahler AK, Akterin S, et al. Genome-wide association analysis identifies 13 new risk loci for schizophrenia. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1150-9.
6. Aberg KA, McClay JL, Nerella S, Clark S, Kumar G, Chen W, et al. Methylome-wide association study of schizophrenia: identifying blood biomarker signatures of environmental insults. JAMA Psychiat. 2014;71:255-64.
7. Aberg KA, McClay JL, Nerella S, Xie LY, Clark SL, Hudson AD, et al. MBD-seq as a cost-effective approach for methylome-wide association studies: demonstration in 1500 case--control samples. Epigenomics. 2012;4:605-21.
8. Aberg KA, Xie L, Chan RF, Zhao M, Pandey AK, Kumar G, et al. Evaluation of methyl-binding domain based enrichment approaches revisited. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0132205.
9. Chen W, Gao G, Nerella S, Hultman CM, Magnusson PK, Sullivan PF, et al. MethylPCA: a toolkit to control for confounders in methylome-wide association studies. BMC Bioinformatics. 2013;14:74.