Dataset Information

NGS allele counts versus called genotypes for testing genetic association.

ABSTRACT: RNA sequence data are commonly summarized as read counts. By contrast, so far there is no alternative to genotype calling for investigating the relationship between genetic variants determined by next-generation sequencing (NGS) and a phenotype of interest. Here we propose and evaluate the direct analysis of allele counts for genetic association tests. Specifically, we assess the potential advantage of the ratio of alternative allele counts to the total number of reads aligned at a specific position of the genome (coverage) over called genotypes. We simulated association studies based on NGS data from HapMap individuals. Genotype quality scores and allele counts were simulated using NGS data from the Personal Genome Project. Real data from the 1000 Genomes Project was also used to compare the two competing approaches. The average proportions of probability values lower or equal to 0.05 amounted to 0.0496 for called genotypes and 0.0485 for the ratio of alternative allele counts to coverage in the null scenario, and to 0.69 for called genotypes and 0.75 for the ratio of alternative allele counts to coverage in the alternative scenario (9% power increase). The advantage in statistical power of the novel approach increased with decreasing coverage, with decreasing genotype quality and with decreasing allele frequency - 124% power increase for variants with a minor allele frequency lower than 0.05. We provide computer code in R to implement the novel approach, which does not preclude the use of complementary data quality filters before or after identification of the most promising association signals.

Author summary

Genetic association tests usually rely on called genotypes. We postulate here that the direct analysis of allele counts from sequence data improves the quality of statistical inference. To evaluate this hypothesis, we investigate simulated and real data using distinct statistical approaches. We demonstrate that association tests based on allele counts rather than called genotypes achieve higher statistical power with controlled type I error rates.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez Silos R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9294184 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGenetic abnormalities have been associated with 6 to 13% of stillbirths, but the true prevalence may be higher. Unlike karyotype analysis, microarray analysis does not require live cells, and it detects small deletions and duplications called copy-number variants.MethodsThe Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network conducted a population-based study of stillbirth in five geographic catchment areas. Standardized postmortem examinations and karyotype analyses were performed. A single-nucleotide polymorphism array was used to detect copy-number variants of at least 500 kb in placental or fetal tissue. Variants that were not identified in any of three databases of apparently unaffected persons were then classified into three groups: probably benign, clinical significance unknown, or pathogenic. We compared the results of karyotype and microarray analyses of samples obtained after delivery.ResultsIn our analysis of samples from 532 stillbirths, microarray analysis yielded results more often than did karyotype analysis (87.4% vs. 70.5%, P<0.001) and provided better detection of genetic abnormalities (aneuploidy or pathogenic copy-number variants, 8.3% vs. 5.8%; P=0.007). Microarray analysis also identified more genetic abnormalities among 443 antepartum stillbirths (8.8% vs. 6.5%, P=0.02) and 67 stillbirths with congenital anomalies (29.9% vs. 19.4%, P=0.008). As compared with karyotype analysis, microarray analysis provided a relative increase in the diagnosis of genetic abnormalities of 41.9% in all stillbirths, 34.5% in antepartum stillbirths, and 53.8% in stillbirths with anomalies.ConclusionsMicroarray analysis is more likely than karyotype analysis to provide a genetic diagnosis, primarily because of its success with nonviable tissue, and is especially valuable in analyses of stillbirths with congenital anomalies or in cases in which karyotype results cannot be obtained. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.).

Project description:Increasingly rich metadata are now being linked to samples that have been whole-genome sequenced. However, much of this information is ignored. This is because linking this metadata to genes, or regions of the genome, usually relies on knowing the gene sequence(s) responsible for the particular trait being measured and looking for its presence or absence in that genome. Examples of this would be the spread of antimicrobial resistance genes carried on mobile genetic elements (MGEs). However, although it is possible to routinely identify the resistance gene, identifying the unknown MGE upon which it is carried can be much more difficult if the starting point is short-read whole-genome sequence data. The reason for this is that MGEs are often full of repeats and so assemble poorly, leading to fragmented consensus sequences. Since mobile DNA, which can carry many clinically and ecologically important genes, has a different evolutionary history from the host, its distribution across the host population will, by definition, be independent of the host phylogeny. It is possible to use this phenomenon in a genome-wide association study to identify both the genes associated with the specific trait and also the DNA linked to that gene, for example the flanking sequence of the plasmid vector on which it is encoded, which follows the same patterns of distribution as the marker gene/sequence itself. We present PlasmidTron, which utilizes the phenotypic data normally available in bacterial population studies, such as antibiograms, virulence factors, or geographical information, to identify traits that are likely to be present on DNA that can randomly reassort across defined bacterial populations. It is also possible to use this methodology to associate unknown genes/sequences (e.g. plasmid backbones) with a specific molecular signature or marker (e.g. resistance gene presence or absence) using PlasmidTron. PlasmidTron uses a k-mer-based approach to identify reads associated with a phylogenetically unlinked phenotype. These reads are then assembled de novo to produce contigs in a fast and scalable-to-large manner. PlasmidTron is written in Python 3 and is available under the open source licence GNU GPL3 from https://github.com/sanger-pathogens/plasmidtron.

Dataset Information

NGS allele counts versus called genotypes for testing genetic association.

Author summary

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets