William R P Denault1,2,3, Astanand Jugessur4,5,6. 1. Department of Genetics and Bioinformatics, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. william.denault@fhi.no. 2. Centre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. william.denault@fhi.no. 3. Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. william.denault@fhi.no. 4. Department of Genetics and Bioinformatics, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. 5. Centre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. 6. Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We present here a computational shortcut to improve a powerful wavelet-based method by Shim and Stephens (Ann Appl Stat 9(2):665-686, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1214/14-AOAS776 ) called WaveQTL that was originally designed to identify DNase I hypersensitivity quantitative trait loci (dsQTL). RESULTS: WaveQTL relies on permutations to evaluate the significance of an association. We applied a recent method by Zhou and Guan (J Am Stat Assoc 113(523):1362-1371, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1328361 ) to boost computational speed, which involves calculating the distribution of Bayes factors and estimating the significance of an association by simulations rather than permutations. We called this simulation-based approach "fast functional wavelet" (FFW), and tested it on a publicly available DNA methylation (DNAm) dataset on colorectal cancer. The simulations confirmed a substantial gain in computational speed compared to the permutation-based approach in WaveQTL. Furthermore, we show that FFW controls the type I error satisfactorily and has good power for detecting differentially methylated regions. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach has broad utility and can be applied to detect associations between different types of functions and phenotypes. As more and more DNAm datasets are being made available through public repositories, an attractive application of FFW would be to re-analyze these data and identify associations that might have been missed by previous efforts. The full R package for FFW is freely available at GitHub https://github.com/william-denault/ffw .
BACKGROUND: We present here a computational shortcut to improve a powerful wavelet-based method by Shim and Stephens (Ann Appl Stat 9(2):665-686, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1214/14-AOAS776 ) called WaveQTL that was originally designed to identify DNase I hypersensitivity quantitative trait loci (dsQTL). RESULTS: WaveQTL relies on permutations to evaluate the significance of an association. We applied a recent method by Zhou and Guan (J Am Stat Assoc 113(523):1362-1371, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1328361 ) to boost computational speed, which involves calculating the distribution of Bayes factors and estimating the significance of an association by simulations rather than permutations. We called this simulation-based approach "fast functional wavelet" (FFW), and tested it on a publicly available DNA methylation (DNAm) dataset on colorectal cancer. The simulations confirmed a substantial gain in computational speed compared to the permutation-based approach in WaveQTL. Furthermore, we show that FFW controls the type I error satisfactorily and has good power for detecting differentially methylated regions. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach has broad utility and can be applied to detect associations between different types of functions and phenotypes. As more and more DNAm datasets are being made available through public repositories, an attractive application of FFW would be to re-analyze these data and identify associations that might have been missed by previous efforts. The full R package for FFW is freely available at GitHub https://github.com/william-denault/ffw .
Entities:
Keywords:
Association analysis; DNA methylation; EWAS; Epigenetics; Wavelets
Authors: Andrew E Jaffe; Peter Murakami; Hwajin Lee; Jeffrey T Leek; M Daniele Fallin; Andrew P Feinberg; Rafael A Irizarry Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Joshua C Denny; Marylyn D Ritchie; Melissa A Basford; Jill M Pulley; Lisa Bastarache; Kristin Brown-Gentry; Deede Wang; Dan R Masys; Dan M Roden; Dana C Crawford Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 6.937
Authors: Jacob F Degner; Athma A Pai; Roger Pique-Regi; Jean-Baptiste Veyrieras; Daniel J Gaffney; Joseph K Pickrell; Sherryl De Leon; Katelyn Michelini; Noah Lewellen; Gregory E Crawford; Matthew Stephens; Yoav Gilad; Jonathan K Pritchard Journal: Nature Date: 2012-02-05 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Masako Suzuki; Will Liao; Frank Wos; Andrew D Johnston; Justin DeGrazia; Jennifer Ishii; Toby Bloom; Michael C Zody; Soren Germer; John M Greally Journal: Genome Res Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Rafael A Irizarry; Christine Ladd-Acosta; Andrew P Feinberg; Bo Wen; Zhijin Wu; Carolina Montano; Patrick Onyango; Hengmi Cui; Kevin Gabo; Michael Rongione; Maree Webster; Hong Ji; James Potash; Sarven Sabunciyan Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2009-01-18 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: William R P Denault; Julia Romanowska; Øyvind Helgeland; Bo Jacobsson; Håkon K Gjessing; Astanand Jugessur Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2021-05-02 Impact factor: 4.547