From genome-wide associations to candidate causal variants by statistical fine-mapping

Nature Reviews Genetics

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2018, Pages 491-504

  Schaid, Daniel J ^a   Chen, Wenan ^b   Larson, Nicholas B ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b ST JUDE CHILDREN S RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENE EXPRESSION; GENE LINKAGE DISEQUILIBRIUM; GENE MAPPING; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; GENOMIC ANNOTATION; GENOMICS; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; ALLELE; CHROMOSOMAL MAPPING; PROCEDURES;

ALLELES; CHROMOSOME MAPPING; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; HUMANS; LINKAGE DISEQUILIBRIUM; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE;

EID: 85047832663     PISSN: 14710056     EISSN: 14710064     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41576-018-0016-z     Document Type: Review

References (121)

1. Hardy, J. &Singleton, A. Genomewide association studies and human disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 1759-1768 (2009).
2. Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Genomewide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature 447, 661-678 (2007).
3. Yang, J. et al. Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height. Nat. Genet. 42, 565-569 (2010).
4. Willer, C. J. et al. Discovery and refinement of loci associated with lipid levels. Nat. Genet. 45, 1274-1283 (2013).
5. Nikpay, M. et al. A comprehensive 1,000 Genomesbased genome-wide association meta-analysis of coronary artery disease. Nat. Genet. 47, 1121-1130 (2015).
6. Al Olama, A. A. et al. A meta-analysis of 87,040 individuals identifies 23 new susceptibility loci for prostate cancer. Nat. Genet. 46, 1103-1109 (2014).
7. Fuchsberger, C. et al. The genetic architecture of type 2 diabetes. Nature 536, 41-47 (2016).
8. Schizophrenia Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium. Biological insights from 108 schizophrenia-associated genetic loci. Nature 511, 421-427 (2014).
9. MacArthur, J. et al. The new NHGRI-EBI Catalog of published genome-wide association studies (GWAS Catalog). Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D896-D901 (2017).
10. MacArthur, D. G. et al. Guidelines for investigating causality of sequence variants in human disease. Nature 508, 469-476 (2014).
11. Ding, K. &Kullo, I. J. Methods for the selection of tagging SNPs: a comparison of tagging efficiency and performance. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 15, 228-236 (2007).
12. Stram, D. Tag SNP selection for association studies. Genet. Epidemiol. 27, 365-374 (2004).
13. Spain, S. L. &Barrett, J. C. Strategies for finemapping complex traits. Hum. Mol. Genet. 24, R111-R119 (2015).
14. Pasaniuc, B. &Price, A. L. Dissecting the genetics of complex traits using summary association statistics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 117-127 (2017). This paper reviews the developments and progress of using summary statistics from genetic association studies to perform joint analyses of genetic variants for use in fine-mapping and to perform transcription-wide association studies (TWAS).
15. Pruim, R. J. et al. LocusZoom: regional visualization of genome-wide association scan results. Bioinformatics 26, 2336-2337 (2010).
16. Manolio, T. A. Genomewide association studies and assessment of the risk of disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 166-176 (2010).
17. Pe'er, I., Yelensky, R., Altshuler, D. &Daly, M. J. Estimation of the multiple testing burden for genomewide association studies of nearly all common variants. Genet. Epidemiol. 32, 381-385 (2008).
18. van de Bunt, M., Cortes, A., Brown, M. A., Morris, A. P. &McCarthy, M. I. Evaluating the performance of fine-mapping strategies at common variant GWAS loci. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005535 (2015). Based on extensive simulations, this paper evaluates various factors that influence statistical fine-mapping and provides guidance on the design of fine-mapping studies.
19. Zaykin, D. V. &Zhivotovsky, L. A. Ranks of genuine associations in whole-genome scans. Genetics 171, 813-823 (2005).
20. Hedrick, P. W. Gametic disequilibrium measures: proceed with caution. Genetics 117, 331-341 (1987).
21. Devlin, B. &Risch, N. A comparison of linkage diequilibrium measures for fine-scale mapping. Genomics 29, 311-322 (1995).
22. Martin, E. R. et al. SNPing away at complex diseases: analysis of single-nucleotide polymorphisms around APOE in Alzheimer disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 67, 383-394 (2000).
23. Guerreiro, R. J. &Hardy, J. TOMM40 association with Alzheimer disease: tales of APOE and linkage disequilibrium. Arch. Neurol. 69, 1243-1244 (2012).
24. Slatkin, M. Linkage disequilibrium - understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future. Nat. Rev. Genet. 9, 477-485 (2008).
25. Marchini, J. &Howie, B. Genotype imputation for genome-wide association studies. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 499-511 (2010).
26. Li, Y., Willer, C., Sanna, S. &Abecasis, G. Genotype imputation. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 10, 387-406 (2009).
27. The Genomes Project Consortium. A global reference for human genetic variation. Nature 526, 68-74 (2015).
28. McCarthy, S. et al. A reference panel of 64,976 haplotypes for genotype imputation. Nat. Genet. 48, 1279-1283 (2016).
29. Southam, L. et al. The effect of genome-wide association scan quality control on imputation outcome for common variants. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 19, 610-614 (2011).
30. Huang, H. et al. Fine-mapping inflammatory bowel disease loci to single-variant resolution. Nature 547, 173-178 (2017). This paper applies three complementary Bayesian fine-mapping methods to a large data set and nicely illustrates novel methods and their interpretations, along with strategies for using annotation to interpret fine-mapping results. The supplemental material is particularly informative for computational strategies for Bayesian fine-mapping.
31. Amos, C. I. et al. The OncoArray Consortium: a network for understanding the genetic architecture of common cancers. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prevent. 26, 126-135 (2017).
32. Voight, B. F. et al. The metabochip, a custom genotyping array for genetic studies of metabolic, cardiovascular, and anthropometric traits. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002793 (2012).
33. Parkes, M., Cortes, A., van Heel, D. A. &Brown, M. A. Genetic insights into common pathways and complex relationships among immune-mediated diseases. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 661-673 (2013).
34. Hocking, R. A biometrics invited paper. The analysis and selection of variables in linear regression. Biometrics 32, 1-49 (1976).
35. Freedman, D. A note on screening regression equations. Am. Statistician 37, 152-155 (1983).
36. Barrett, J. C., Fry, B., Maller, J. &Daly, M. J. Haploview: analysis and visualization of LD and haplotype maps. Bioinformatics 21, 263-265 (2005).
37. Daly, M., Rioux, J., Schaffner, S., Hudson, T. &Lander, E. High-resolution haplotype structure in the human genome. Nat. Genet. 29, 229-232 (2001).
38. Wall, J. D. &Pritchard, J. K. Haplotype blocks and linkage disequilibrium in the human genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4, 587-597 (2003).
39. Schwartz, R., Halldorsson, B. V., Bafna, V., Clark, A. G. &Istrail, S. Robustness of inference of haplotype block structure. J. Comp. Biol. 10, 13-19 (2003).
40. Tibshirani, R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J. R. Statist. Soc. B 58, 267-288 (1996).
41. Cho, S., Kim, H., Oh, S., Kim, K. &Park, T. Elastic-net regularization approaches for genome-wide association studies of rheumatoid arthritis. BMC Proc. 3 (Suppl. 7), S25 (2009).
42. Breheny, P. &Huang, J. Penalized methods for bi-level variable selection. Statist. Interface 2, 369-380 (2009).
43. Hoggart, C. J., Whittaker, J. C., De Iorio, M. &Balding, D. J. Simultaneous analysis of all SNPs in genome-wide and re-sequencing association studies. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000130 (2008).
44. Ayers, K. L. &Cordell, H. J. SNP selection in genomewide and candidate gene studies via penalized logistic regression. Genet. Epidemiol. 34, 879-891 (2010).
45. Guan, Y. &Stephens, M. Bayesian variable selection regression for genome-wide association studies, and other large-scale problems. Ann. Appl. Statist. 5, 1780-1815 (2011). This paper provides a Bayesian computational framework to consider a large number of causal variants.
46. Hormozdiari, F., Kostem, E., Kang, E. Y., Pasaniuc, B. &Eskin, E. Identifying causal variants at loci with multiple signals of association. Genetics 198, 497-508 (2014).
47. Chen, W. et al. Fine mapping causal variants with an approximate Bayesian method using marginal test statistics. Genetics 200, 719-736 (2015). This paper links Bayesian fine-mapping using summary statistics and full data and describes an efficient computational approach using only relevant variables for each candidate model.
48. Wilson, M. A., Iversen, E. S., Clyde, M. A., Schmidler, S. C. &Schildkraut, J. M. Bayesian model search and multilevel inference for SNP association studies. Ann. Appl. Statist. 4, 1342-1364 (2010).
49. Carlin, B. &Louis, T. Bayesian Methods for Data Analysis 3rd edn, (Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Fl, USA, 2008).
50. Maller, J. B. et al. Bayesian refinement of association signals for 14 loci in 3 common diseases. Nat. Genet. 44, 1294-1301 (2012).
51. Wallace, C. et al. Dissection of a complex disease susceptibility region using a bayesian stochastic search approach to fine mapping. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005272 (2015).
52. Wen, X., Lee, Y., Luca, F. &Pique-Regi, R. Efficient Integrative Multi-SNP Association Analysis via Deterministic Approximation of Posteriors. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 1114-1129 (2016).
53. Benner, C. et al. FINEMAP: efficient variable selection using summary data from genome-wide association studies. Bioinformatics 32, 1493-1501 (2016).
54. Kichaev, G. et al. Improved methods for multi-trait fine mapping of pleiotropic risk loci. Bioinformatics 33, 248-255 (2017).
55. Newcombe, P. J., Conti, D. V. &Richardson, S. JAM: a scalable bayesian framework for joint analysis of marginal SNP effects. Genet. Epidemiol. 40, 188-201 (2016). This paper builds on prior developments of Bayes methods for fine-mapping and develops a computationally efficient method to explore a wide range of models that can include multiple causal variants in regions of interest.
56. Dadaev, T. et al. Fine-mapping of prostate cancer susceptibility loci in a large meta-analysis identifies candidate causal variants. Nat. Commun. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04109-8 (2018). This paper illustrates practical approaches to fine-mapping many genomic regions using Bayesian methods and illustrates the use of quantile regression to evaluate how genomic annotation is associated with SNPs that have a large Bayes posterior probability of being causally related to prostate cancer.
57. Kichaev, G. et al. Integrating functional data to prioritize causal variants in statistical fine-mapping studies. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004722 (2014). This is the first of a series of papers regarding PAINTOR software for fine-mapping, allowing multiple causal variants and summary statistics and integrating functional annotations.
58. Lin, D. Y. &Zeng, D. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies: no efficiency gain in using individual participant data. Genet. Epidemiol. 34, 60-66 (2010).
59. Yang, J. et al. Conditional and joint multiple-SNP analysis of GWAS summary statistics identifies additional variants influencing complex traits. Nat. Genet. 44, 369-375 (2012).
60. Benner, C. et al. Prospects of fine-mapping traitassociated genomic regions by using summary statistics from genome-wide association studies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 101, 539-551 (2017).
61. Ntzani, E. E., Liberopoulos, G., Manolio, T. A. &Ioannidis, J. P. Consistency of genome-wide associations across major ancestral groups. Hum. Genet. 131, 1057-1071 (2012).
62. Marigorta, U. M. &Navarro, A. High trans-ethnic replicability of GWAS results implies common causal variants. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003566 (2013). This paper illustrates that common genetic associations of complex traits are highly conserved across diverse ethnic populations and motivates the application of trans-ethnic analysis.
63. Li, Y. R. &Keating, B. J. Trans-ethnic genome-wide association studies: advantages and challenges of mapping in diverse populations. Genome Med. 6, 91 (2014).
64. Zaitlen, N., Pasaniuc, B., Gur, T., Ziv, E. &Halperin, E. Leveraging genetic variability across populations for the identification of causal variants. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 86, 23-33 (2010).
65. Asimit, J. L., Hatzikotoulas, K., McCarthy, M., Morris, A. P. &Zeggini, E. Trans-ethnic study design approaches for fine-mapping. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 1330-1336 (2016). This paper demonstrates that reductions in fine-mapping credible sets are heavily dependent on ancestral composition of contributing studies and emphasizes the importance of trans-ethnic study design.
66. Han, B. &Eskin, E. Random-effects model aimed at discovering associations in meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 88, 586-598 (2011).
67. Wang, X. et al. Comparing methods for performing trans-ethnic meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Hum. Mol. Genet. 22, 2303-2311 (2013).
68. van Rooij, F. J. et al. Genome-wide trans-ethnic meta-analysis identifies seven genetic loci influencing erythrocyte traits and a role for RBPMS in erythropoiesis. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 51-63 (2017).
69. Franceschini, N. et al. Variant discovery and fine mapping of genetic loci associated with blood pressure traits in Hispanics and African Americans. PLoS ONE 11, e0164132 (2016).
70. Larson, N. B. et al. Trans-ethnic meta-analysis identifies common and rare variants associated with hepatocyte growth factor levels in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Ann. Hum. Genet. 79, 264-274 (2015).
71. Kichaev, G. &Pasaniuc, B. Leveraging functionalannotation data in trans-ethnic fine-mapping studies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 97, 260-271 (2015).
72. Morris, A. P. Transethnic meta-analysis of genomewide association studies. Genet. Epidemiol. 35, 809-822 (2011). This paper introduces a Bayesian partition model framework for trans-ethnic fine-mapping by clustering study populations based on genetic similarity in order to account for heterogeneity of allelic effects on a trait.
73. Cannon, M. E. et al. Trans-ancestry fine mapping and molecular assays identify regulatory variants at the ANGPTL8 HDL-C GWAS locus. G3 7, 3217-3227 (2017).
74. Magi, R. et al. Trans-ethnic meta-regression of genomewide association studies accounting for ancestry increases power for discovery and improves fine-mapping resolution. Hum. Mol. Genet. 26, 3639-3650 (2017).
75. Yon Rhee, S., Wood, V., Dolinski, K. &Draghici, S. Use and misuse of the gene ontology annotations. Nat. Rev. Genet. 9, 509 (2008).
76. Harrow, J. et al. GENCODE: the reference human genome annotation for The ENCODE Project. Genome Res. 22, 1760-1774 (2012).
77. ENCODE Project Consortium. The ENCODE (ENCyclopedia Of DNA Elements) Project. Science 306, 636-640 (2004).
78. Andersson, R. et al. An atlas of active enhancers across human cell types and tissues. Nature 507, 455-461 (2014).
79. Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature 518, 317-330 (2015).
80. Pennisi, E. ENCODE project writes eulogy for junk DNA. Science 337, 1159-1161 (2012).
81. Maurano, M. T. et al. Systematic localization of common disease-associated variation in regulatory DNA. Science 337, 1190-1195 (2012). This paper leverages cell-line regulatory annotation to identify disease-relevant cell types and reveals that common genetic trait associations are enriched in functional DNA.
82. Ma, M. et al. Disease-associated variants in different categories of disease located in distinct regulatory elements. BMC Genomics 16 (Suppl. 8), S3 (2015).
83. Trynka, G. et al. Chromatin marks identify critical cell types for fine mapping complex trait variants. Nat. Genet. 45, 124-130 (2013).
84. Mudge, J. M. &Harrow, J. The state of play in higher eukaryote gene annotation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 758-772 (2016).
85. Eilbeck, K., Quinlan, A. &Yandell, M. Settling the score: variant prioritization and Mendelian disease. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 599-612 (2017).
86. Kircher, M. et al. A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants. Nat. Genet. 46, 310-315 (2014).
87. Ioannidis, N. M. et al. REVEL: an ensemble method for predicting the pathogenicity of rare missense variants. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 99, (877-885 (2016).
88. Birney, E. et al. Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project. Nature 447, 799-816 (2007).
89. Wingender, E., Dietze, P., Karas, H. &Knuppel, R. TRANSFAC: a database on transcription factors and their DNA binding sites. Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 238-241 (1996).
90. Mathelier, A. et al. JASPAR 2014: an extensively expanded and updated open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D142-D147 (2014).
91. Ioannidis, N. et al. FIRE: functional inference of genetic variants that regulate gene expression. Bioinformatics 33, 3895-3901 (2017).
92. Boyle, A. P. et al. Annotation of functional variation in personal genomes using RegulomeDB. Genome Res. 22, 1790-1797 (2012).
93. Sveinbjornsson, G. et al. Weighting sequence variants based on their annotation increases power of whole-genome association studies. Nat. Genet. 48, 314-317 (2016).
94. Chen, W., McDonnell, S., Thibodeau, S., Tillmans, L. &Schaid, D. Incorporating functional annotations for fine-mapping causal variants in a Bayesian framework using summary statistics. Genetics 204, 933-958 (2016).
95. Pickrell, J. K. Joint analysis of functional genomic data and genome-wide association studies of 18 human traits. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 94, 559-573 (2014).
96. Wen, X., Luca, F. &Pique-Regi, R. Cross-population joint analysis of eQTLs: fine mapping and functional annotation. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005176 (2015).
97. Quintana, M. A. et al. Incorporating prior biologic information for high-dimensional rare variant association studies. Hum. Hered. 74, 184-195 (2012).
98. Nicolae, D. L. et al. Trait-associated SNPs are more likely to be eQTLs: annotation to enhance discovery from GWAS. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000888 (2010).
99. Millstein, J., Zhang, B., Zhu, J. &Schadt, E. E. Disentangling molecular relationships with a causal inference test. BMC Genet. 10, 23 (2009).
100. Giambartolomei, C. et al. Bayesian test for colocalisation between pairs of genetic association studies using summary statistics. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004383 (2014).
101. Hormozdiari, F. et al. Colocalization of GWAS and eQTL signals detects target genes. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 99, 1245-1260 (2016).
102. Zhu, Z. H. et al. Integration of summary data from GWAS and eQTL studies predicts complex trait gene targets. Nat. Genet. 48, 481-487 (2016).
103. Battle, A., Brown, C. D., Engelhardt, B. E. &Montgomery, S. B. Genetic effects on gene expression across human tissues. Nature 550, 204-213 (2017).
104. Magenis, R. E., Brown, M. G., Lacy, D. A., Budden, S. &LaFranchi, S. Is Angelman syndrome an alternate result of del(15)(q11q13)? Am. J. Med. Genet. 28, 829-838 (1987).
105. Antonacci, F. et al. Characterization of six human disease-associated inversion polymorphisms. Hum. Mol. Genet. 18, 2555-2566 (2009).
106. Wu, Y., Zheng, Z., Visscher, P. M. &Yang, J. Quantifying the mapping precision of genome-wide association studies using whole-genome sequencing data. Genome Biol. 18, 86 (2017).
107. Auer, P. L. et al. Guidelines for large-scale sequence-based complex trait association studies: lessons learned from the NHLBI Exome Sequencing Project. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 99, 791-801 (2016).
108. Wu, M. C. et al. Rare-variant association testing for sequencing data with the sequence kernel association test. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 89, 82-93 (2011).
109. Morrison, A. C. et al. Practical approaches for wholegenome sequence analysis of heart-and blood-related traits. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 205-215 (2017).
110. Guidugli, L. et al. Assessment of the clinical relevance of BRCA2 missense variants by functional and computational approaches. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 102, 233-248 (2018).
111. Boyle, E. A., Li, Y. I. &Pritchard, J. K. An expanded view of complex traits: from polygenic to omnigenic. Cell 169, 1177-1186 (2017).
112. Haralambieva, I. H. et al. Genome-wide associations of CD46 and IFI44L genetic variants with neutralizing antibody response to measles vaccine. Hum. Genet. 136, 421-435 (2017).
113. Servin, B. &Stephens, M. Imputation-based analysis of association studies: candidate regions and quantitative traits. PLoS Genet. 3, e114 (2007).
114. Guan, Y. &Stephens, M. Practical issues in imputation-based association mapping. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000279 (2008).
115. Stephens, M. A unified framework for association analysis with multiple related phenotypes. PloS ONE 8, e65245 (2013).
116. Shim, H. et al. A multivariate genome-wide association analysis of 10 LDL subfractions, and their response to statin treatment, in 1868 Caucasians. PloS ONE 10, e0120758 (2015).
117. Marchini, J., Howie, B., Myers, S., McVean, G. &Donnelly, P. A new multipoint method for genomewide association studies by imputation of genotypes. Nat. Genet. 39, 906-913 (2007).
118. Quintana, M. A. &Conti, D. V. Integrative variable selection via Bayesian model uncertainty. Stat. Med. 32, 4938-4953 (2013).
119. Quintana, M. A., Berstein, J. L., Thomas, D. C. &Conti, D. V. Incorporating model uncertainty in detecting rare variants: the Bayesian risk index. Genet. Epidemiol. 35, 638-649 (2011).
120. Jostins, L. &McVean, G. Trinculo: Bayesian and frequentist multinomial logistic regression for genomewide association studies of multi-category phenotypes. Bioinformatics 32, 1898-1900 (2016).
121. Wakefield, J. Bayes factors for genome-wide association studies: comparison with P-values. Genet. Epidemiol. 33, 79-86 (2008).