Literature DB >> 33888908

Genetic analyses identify widespread sex-differential participation bias.

Nicola Pirastu1, Mattia Cordioli2, Michel G Nivard3,4,5, John R B Perry6, Andrea Ganna7,8,9, Priyanka Nandakumar10, Gianmarco Mignogna2,11,12, Abdel Abdellaoui13, Benjamin Hollis14,15, Masahiro Kanai12,16,17,18, Veera M Rajagopal19,20,21,22, Pietro Della Briotta Parolo2, Nikolas Baya12,23, Caitlin E Carey12,23, Juha Karjalainen2,12,16, Thomas D Als19,20,21,22, Matthijs D Van der Zee3, Felix R Day14, Ken K Ong14,24, Takayuki Morisaki25,26,27, Eco de Geus3,28, Rino Bellocco11,29, Yukinori Okada18,30,31, Anders D Børglum19,20,21,22, Peter Joshi1, Adam Auton10, David Hinds10, Benjamin M Neale12,23, Raymond K Walters12,23.   

Abstract

Genetic association results are often interpreted with the assumption that study participation does not affect downstream analyses. Understanding the genetic basis of participation bias is challenging since it requires the genotypes of unseen individuals. Here we demonstrate that it is possible to estimate comparative biases by performing a genome-wide association study contrasting one subgroup versus another. For example, we showed that sex exhibits artifactual autosomal heritability in the presence of sex-differential participation bias. By performing a genome-wide association study of sex in approximately 3.3 million males and females, we identified over 158 autosomal loci spuriously associated with sex and highlighted complex traits underpinning differences in study participation between the sexes. For example, the body mass index-increasing allele at FTO was observed at higher frequency in males compared to females (odds ratio = 1.02, P = 4.4 × 10-36). Finally, we demonstrated how these biases can potentially lead to incorrect inferences in downstream analyses and propose a conceptual framework for addressing such biases. Our findings highlight a new challenge that genetic studies may face as sample sizes continue to grow.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33888908      PMCID: PMC7611642          DOI: 10.1038/s41588-021-00846-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Genet        ISSN: 1061-4036            Impact factor:   38.330


  52 in total

1.  Sample selection and validity of exposure-disease association estimates in cohort studies.

Authors:  Costanza Pizzi; Bianca De Stavola; Franco Merletti; Rino Bellocco; Isabel dos Santos Silva; Neil Pearce; Lorenzo Richiardi
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  UK Biobank, big data, and the consequences of non-representativeness.

Authors:  Katherine M Keyes; Daniel Westreich
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2019-03-30       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Why representativeness should be avoided.

Authors:  Kenneth J Rothman; John E J Gallacher; Elizabeth E Hatch
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Commentary: On representativeness.

Authors:  J Mark Elwood
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.196

5.  The UK Biobank and selection bias.

Authors:  James M Swanson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-07-14       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Cohort Profile: Estonian Biobank of the Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu.

Authors:  Liis Leitsalu; Toomas Haller; Tõnu Esko; Mari-Liis Tammesoo; Helene Alavere; Harold Snieder; Markus Perola; Pauline C Ng; Reedik Mägi; Lili Milani; Krista Fischer; Andres Metspalu
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  The iPSYCH2012 case-cohort sample: new directions for unravelling genetic and environmental architectures of severe mental disorders.

Authors:  C B Pedersen; J Bybjerg-Grauholm; M G Pedersen; J Grove; E Agerbo; M Bækvad-Hansen; J B Poulsen; C S Hansen; J J McGrath; T D Als; J I Goldstein; B M Neale; M J Daly; D M Hougaard; O Mors; M Nordentoft; A D Børglum; T Werge; P B Mortensen
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 15.992

8.  Comparison of Sociodemographic and Health-Related Characteristics of UK Biobank Participants With Those of the General Population.

Authors:  Anna Fry; Thomas J Littlejohns; Cathie Sudlow; Nicola Doherty; Ligia Adamska; Tim Sprosen; Rory Collins; Naomi E Allen
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Equitable Participation in Biobanks: The Risks and Benefits of a "Dynamic Consent" Approach.

Authors:  Megan Prictor; Harriet J A Teare; Jane Kaye
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2018-09-05

10.  Representativeness of the LifeLines Cohort Study.

Authors:  Bart Klijs; Salome Scholtens; Jornt J Mandemakers; Harold Snieder; Ronald P Stolk; Nynke Smidt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  32 in total

1.  Sex differences in genetic architecture in the UK Biobank.

Authors:  Elena Bernabeu; Oriol Canela-Xandri; Konrad Rawlik; Andrea Talenti; James Prendergast; Albert Tenesa
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2021-09-07       Impact factor: 38.330

Review 2.  Ten challenges for clinical translation in psychiatric genetics.

Authors:  Eske M Derks; Jackson G Thorp; Zachary F Gerring
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 41.307

3.  Genetic correlates of phenotypic heterogeneity in autism.

Authors:  Varun Warrier; Xinhe Zhang; Patrick Reed; Alexandra Havdahl; Tyler M Moore; Freddy Cliquet; Claire S Leblond; Thomas Rolland; Anders Rosengren; David H Rowitch; Matthew E Hurles; Daniel H Geschwind; Anders D Børglum; Elise B Robinson; Jakob Grove; Hilary C Martin; Thomas Bourgeron; Simon Baron-Cohen
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 41.307

4.  A theory-based practical solution to correct for sex-differential participation bias.

Authors:  Hanbin Lee; Buhm Han
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 17.906

Review 5.  Open problems in human trait genetics.

Authors:  Nadav Brandes; Omer Weissbrod; Michal Linial
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 17.906

6.  Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Attributable Cardiovascular Disease Risk Is Sex Specific.

Authors:  Arjen J Cupido; Folkert W Asselbergs; A Floriaan Schmidt; G Kees Hovingh
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 6.106

7.  Examining Sex-Differentiated Genetic Effects Across Neuropsychiatric and Behavioral Traits.

Authors:  Joanna Martin; Ekaterina A Khramtsova; Slavina B Goleva; Gabriëlla A M Blokland; Michela Traglia; Raymond K Walters; Christopher Hübel; Jonathan R I Coleman; Gerome Breen; Anders D Børglum; Ditte Demontis; Jakob Grove; Thomas Werge; Janita Bralten; Cynthia M Bulik; Phil H Lee; Carol A Mathews; Roseann E Peterson; Stacey J Winham; Naomi Wray; Howard J Edenberg; Wei Guo; Yin Yao; Benjamin M Neale; Stephen V Faraone; Tracey L Petryshen; Lauren A Weiss; Laramie E Duncan; Jill M Goldstein; Jordan W Smoller; Barbara E Stranger; Lea K Davis
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 13.382

8.  Ancestry- and sex-specific effects underlying inguinal hernia susceptibility identified in a multiethnic genome-wide association study meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hélène Choquet; Weiyu Li; Jie Yin; Rachael Bradley; Thomas J Hoffmann; Priyanka Nandakumar; Rouzbeh Mostaedi; Chao Tian; Nadav Ahituv; Eric Jorgenson
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 5.121

9.  Evaluating human autosomal loci for sexually antagonistic viability selection in two large biobanks.

Authors:  Katja R Kasimatis; Abin Abraham; Peter L Ralph; Andrew D Kern; John A Capra; Patrick C Phillips
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  Sex-Dependent Shared and Nonshared Genetic Architecture Across Mood and Psychotic Disorders.

Authors:  Gabriëlla A M Blokland; Jakob Grove; Chia-Yen Chen; Chris Cotsapas; Stuart Tobet; Robert Handa; David St Clair; Todd Lencz; Bryan J Mowry; Sathish Periyasamy; Murray J Cairns; Paul A Tooney; Jing Qin Wu; Brian Kelly; George Kirov; Patrick F Sullivan; Aiden Corvin; Brien P Riley; Tõnu Esko; Lili Milani; Erik G Jönsson; Aarno Palotie; Hannelore Ehrenreich; Martin Begemann; Agnes Steixner-Kumar; Pak C Sham; Nakao Iwata; Daniel R Weinberger; Pablo V Gejman; Alan R Sanders; Joseph D Buxbaum; Dan Rujescu; Ina Giegling; Bettina Konte; Annette M Hartmann; Elvira Bramon; Robin M Murray; Michele T Pato; Jimmy Lee; Ingrid Melle; Espen Molden; Roel A Ophoff; Andrew McQuillin; Nicholas J Bass; Rolf Adolfsson; Anil K Malhotra; Nicholas G Martin; Janice M Fullerton; Philip B Mitchell; Peter R Schofield; Andreas J Forstner; Franziska Degenhardt; Sabrina Schaupp; Ashley L Comes; Manolis Kogevinas; José Guzman-Parra; Andreas Reif; Fabian Streit; Lea Sirignano; Sven Cichon; Maria Grigoroiu-Serbanescu; Joanna Hauser; Jolanta Lissowska; Fermin Mayoral; Bertram Müller-Myhsok; Beata Świątkowska; Thomas G Schulze; Markus M Nöthen; Marcella Rietschel; John Kelsoe; Marion Leboyer; Stéphane Jamain; Bruno Etain; Frank Bellivier; John B Vincent; Martin Alda; Claire O'Donovan; Pablo Cervantes; Joanna M Biernacka; Mark Frye; Susan L McElroy; Laura J Scott; Eli A Stahl; Mikael Landén; Marian L Hamshere; Olav B Smeland; Srdjan Djurovic; Arne E Vaaler; Ole A Andreassen; Bernhard T Baune; Tracy Air; Martin Preisig; Rudolf Uher; Douglas F Levinson; Myrna M Weissman; James B Potash; Jianxin Shi; James A Knowles; Roy H Perlis; Susanne Lucae; Dorret I Boomsma; Brenda W J H Penninx; Jouke-Jan Hottenga; Eco J C de Geus; Gonneke Willemsen; Yuri Milaneschi; Henning Tiemeier; Hans J Grabe; Alexander Teumer; Sandra Van der Auwera; Uwe Völker; Steven P Hamilton; Patrik K E Magnusson; Alexander Viktorin; Divya Mehta; Niamh Mullins; Mark J Adams; Gerome Breen; Andrew M McIntosh; Cathryn M Lewis; David M Hougaard; Merete Nordentoft; Ole Mors; Preben B Mortensen; Thomas Werge; Thomas D Als; Anders D Børglum; Tracey L Petryshen; Jordan W Smoller; Jill M Goldstein
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 12.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.