Dataset Information

Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Epistasis is recognized fundamentally important for understanding the mechanism of disease-causing genetic variation. Though many novel methods for detecting epistasis have been proposed, few studies focus on their comparison. Undertaking a comprehensive comparison study is an urgent task and a pathway of the methods to real applications. RESULTS: This paper aims at a comparison study of epistasis detection methods through applying related software packages on datasets. For this purpose, we categorize methods according to their search strategies, and select five representative methods (TEAM, BOOST, SNPRuler, AntEpiSeeker and epiMODE) originating from different underlying techniques for comparison. The methods are tested on simulated datasets with different size, various epistasis models, and with/without noise. The types of noise include missing data, genotyping error and phenocopy. Performance is evaluated by detection power (three forms are introduced), robustness, sensitivity and computational complexity. CONCLUSIONS: None of selected methods is perfect in all scenarios and each has its own merits and limitations. In terms of detection power, AntEpiSeeker performs best on detecting epistasis displaying marginal effects (eME) and BOOST performs best on identifying epistasis displaying no marginal effects (eNME). In terms of robustness, AntEpiSeeker is robust to all types of noise on eME models, BOOST is robust to genotyping error and phenocopy on eNME models, and SNPRuler is robust to phenocopy on eME models and missing data on eNME models. In terms of sensitivity, AntEpiSeeker is the winner on eME models and both SNPRuler and BOOST perform well on eNME models. In terms of computational complexity, BOOST is the fastest among the methods. In terms of overall performance, AntEpiSeeker and BOOST are recommended as the efficient and effective methods. This comparison study may provide guidelines for applying the methods and further clues for epistasis detection.

SUBMITTER: Shang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3259123 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis.

Shang Junliang J Zhang Junying J Sun Yan Y Liu Dan D Ye Daojun D Yin Yaling Y

BMC bioinformatics 20111215

<h4>Background</h4>Epistasis is recognized fundamentally important for understanding the mechanism of disease-causing genetic variation. Though many novel methods for detecting epistasis have been proposed, few studies focus on their comparison. Undertaking a comprehensive comparison study is an urgent task and a pathway of the methods to real applications.<h4>Results</h4>This paper aims at a comparison study of epistasis detection methods through applying related software packages on datasets. ...[more]

PMID: 22172045

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPart of the missing heritability in Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) is expected to be explained by interactions between genetic variants, also called epistasis. Various statistical methods have been developed to detect epistasis in case-control GWAS. These methods face major statistical challenges due to the number of tests required, the complexity of the Linkage Disequilibrium (LD) structure, and the lack of consensus regarding the definition of epistasis. Their limited impact in terms of uncovering new biological knowledge might be explained in part by the limited amount of experimental data available to validate their statistical performances in a realistic GWAS context. In this paper, we introduce a simulation pipeline for generating real scale GWAS data, including epistasis and realistic LD structure. We evaluate five exhaustive bivariate interaction methods, fastepi, GBOOST, SHEsisEpi, DSS, and IndOR. Two hundred thirty four different disease scenarios are considered in extensive simulations. We report the performances of each method in terms of false positive rate control, power, area under the ROC curve (AUC), and computation time using a GPU. Finally we compare the result of each methods on a real GWAS of type 2 diabetes from the Welcome Trust Case Control Consortium.ResultsGBOOST, SHEsisEpi and DSS allow a satisfactory control of the false positive rate. fastepi and IndOR present an increase in false positive rate in presence of LD between causal SNPs, with our definition of epistasis. DSS performs best in terms of power and AUC in most scenarios with no or weak LD between causal SNPs. All methods can exhaustively analyze a GWAS with 6.105 SNPs and 15,000 samples in a couple of hours using a GPU.ConclusionThis study confirms that computation time is no longer a limiting factor for performing an exhaustive search of epistasis in large GWAS. For this task, using DSS on SNP pairs with limited LD seems to be a good strategy to achieve the best statistical performance. A combination approach using both DSS and GBOOST is supported by the simulation results and the analysis of the WTCCC dataset demonstrated that this approach can detect distinct genes in epistasis. Finally, weak epistasis between common variants will be detectable with existing methods when GWAS of a few tens of thousands cases and controls are available.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Genome-wide association studies have identified many susceptibility loci for obesity. However, missing heritability problem is still challenging and ignorance of genetic interactions is believed to be an important cause. Current methods for detecting interactions usually do not consider regulatory elements in non-coding regions. Interaction analyses within chromatin regulatory circuitry may identify new susceptibility loci. METHODS:We developed a pipeline named interaction analyses within chromatin regulatory circuitry (IACRC), to identify genetic interactions impacting body mass index (BMI). Potential interacting SNP pairs were obtained based on Hi-C datasets, PreSTIGE (Predicting Specific Tissue Interactions of Genes and Enhancers) algorithm, and super enhancer regions. SNP?×?SNP analyses were next performed in three GWAS datasets, including 2286 unrelated Caucasians from Kansas City, 3062 healthy Caucasians from the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative, and 3164 Hispanic subjects from the Women's Health Initiative. RESULTS:A total of 16,643,227 SNP?×?SNP analyses were performed. Meta-analyses showed that two SNP pairs, rs6808450-rs9813534 (combined P?=?2.39?×?10-9) and rs6808450-rs3773306 (combined P?=?2.89?×?10-9) were associated with BMI after multiple testing corrections. Single-SNP analyses did not detect significant association signals for these three SNPs. In obesity relevant cells, rs6808450 is located in intergenic enhancers, while rs9813534 and rs3773306 are located in the region of strong transcription regions of CAND2 and RPL32, respectively. The expression of CAND2 was significantly downregulated after the differentiation of human Simpson-Golabi-Behmel syndrome (SGBS) preadipocyte cells (P?=?0.0241). Functional validation in the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium database showed that CAND2 was associated with increased lean body mass and decreased total body fat amount. CONCLUSIONS:Detecting epistasis within chromatin regulatory circuitry identified CAND2 as a novel obesity susceptibility gene. We hope IACRC could facilitate the interaction analyses for complex diseases and offer new insights into solving the missing heritability problem.

Dataset Information

Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis.

Publications

Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets