Dataset Information

The EWAS Catalog: a database of epigenome-wide association studies.

ABSTRACT: Epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) seek to quantify associations between traits/exposures and DNA methylation measured at thousands or millions of CpG sites across the genome. In recent years, the increase in availability of DNA methylation measures in population-based cohorts and case-control studies has resulted in a dramatic expansion of the number of EWAS being performed and published. To make this rich source of results more accessible, we have manually curated a database of CpG-trait associations (with p<1x10 ^-4) from published EWAS, each assaying over 100,000 CpGs in at least 100 individuals. From January 7, 2022, The EWAS Catalog contained 1,737,746 associations from 2,686 EWAS. This includes 1,345,398 associations from 342 peer-reviewed publications. In addition, it also contains summary statistics for 392,348 associations from 427 EWAS, performed on data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) and the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). The database is accompanied by a web-based tool and R package, giving researchers the opportunity to query EWAS associations quickly and easily, and gain insight into the molecular underpinnings of disease as well as the impact of traits and exposures on the DNA methylome. The EWAS Catalog data extraction team continue to update the database monthly and we encourage any EWAS authors to upload their summary statistics to our website. Details of how to upload data can be found here: http://www.ewascatalog.org/upload. The EWAS Catalog is available at http://www.ewascatalog.org.

SUBMITTER: Battram T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9096146 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The EWAS Catalog: a database of epigenome-wide association studies.

Battram Thomas T Yousefi Paul P Crawford Gemma G Prince Claire C Sheikhali Babaei Mahsa M Sharp Gemma G Hatcher Charlie C Vega-Salas María Jesús MJ Khodabakhsh Sahar S Whitehurst Oliver O Langdon Ryan R Mahoney Luke L Elliott Hannah R HR Mancano Giulia G Lee Matthew A MA Watkins Sarah H SH Lay Abigail C AC Hemani Gibran G Gaunt Tom R TR Relton Caroline L CL Staley James R JR Suderman Matthew M

Wellcome open research 20220531

Epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) seek to quantify associations between traits/exposures and DNA methylation measured at thousands or millions of CpG sites across the genome. In recent years, the increase in availability of DNA methylation measures in population-based cohorts and case-control studies has resulted in a dramatic expansion of the number of EWAS being performed and published. To make this rich source of results more accessible, we have manually curated a database of CpG-trai ...[more]

PMID: 35592546

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhen designing an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) to investigate the relationship between DNA methylation (DNAm) and some exposure(s) or phenotype(s), it is critically important to assess the sample size needed to detect a hypothesized difference with adequate statistical power. However, the complex and nuanced nature of DNAm data makes direct assessment of statistical power challenging. To circumvent these challenges and to address the outstanding need for a user-friendly interface for EWAS power evaluation, we have developed pwrEWAS.ResultsThe current implementation of pwrEWAS accommodates power estimation for two-group comparisons of DNAm (e.g. case vs control, exposed vs non-exposed, etc.), where methylation assessment is carried out using the Illumina Human Methylation BeadChip technology. Power is calculated using a semi-parametric simulation-based approach in which DNAm data is randomly generated from beta-distributions using CpG-specific means and variances estimated from one of several different existing DNAm data sets, chosen to cover the most common tissue-types used in EWAS. In addition to specifying the tissue type to be used for DNAm profiling, users are required to specify the sample size, number of differentially methylated CpGs, effect size(s) (Δβ), target false discovery rate (FDR) and the number of simulated data sets, and have the option of selecting from several different statistical methods to perform differential methylation analyses. pwrEWAS reports the marginal power, marginal type I error rate, marginal FDR, and false discovery cost (FDC). Here, we demonstrate how pwrEWAS can be applied in practice using a hypothetical EWAS. In addition, we report its computational efficiency across a variety of user settings.ConclusionBoth under- and overpowered studies unnecessarily deplete resources and even risk failure of a study. With pwrEWAS, we provide a user-friendly tool to help researchers circumvent these risks and to assist in the design and planning of EWAS.AvailabilityThe web interface is written in the R statistical programming language using Shiny (RStudio Inc., 2016) and is available at https://biostats-shinyr.kumc.edu/pwrEWAS/ . The R package for pwrEWAS is publicly available at GitHub ( https://github.com/stefangraw/pwrEWAS ).

Project description:BackgroundIn DNA methylation analyses like epigenome-wide association studies, effects in differentially methylated CpG sites are assessed. Two kinds of outcomes can be used for statistical analysis: Beta-values and M-values. M-values follow a normal distribution and help to detect differentially methylated CpG sites. As biological effect measures, differences of M-values are more or less meaningless. Beta-values are of more interest since they can be interpreted directly as differences in percentage of DNA methylation at a given CpG site, but they have poor statistical properties. Different frameworks are proposed for reporting estimands in DNA methylation analysis, relying on Beta-values, M-values, or both.ResultsWe present and discuss four possible approaches of achieving estimands in DNA methylation analysis. In addition, we present the usage of M-values or Beta-values in the context of bioinformatical pipelines, which often demand a predefined outcome. We show the dependencies between the differences in M-values to differences in Beta-values in two data simulations: a analysis with and without confounder effect. Without present confounder effects, M-values can be used for the statistical analysis and Beta-values statistics for the reporting. If confounder effects exist, we demonstrate the deviations and correct the effects by the intercept method. Finally, we demonstrate the theoretical problem on two large human genome-wide DNA methylation datasets to verify the results.ConclusionsThe usage of M-values in the analysis of DNA methylation data will produce effect estimates, which cannot be biologically interpreted. The parallel usage of Beta-value statistics ignores possible confounder effects and can therefore not be recommended. Hence, if the differences in Beta-values are the focus of the study, the intercept method is recommendable. Hyper- or hypomethylated CpG sites must then be carefully evaluated. If an exploratory analysis of possible CpG sites is the aim of the study, M-values can be used for inference.

Dataset Information

The EWAS Catalog: a database of epigenome-wide association studies.

Publications

The EWAS Catalog: a database of epigenome-wide association studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets