Literature DB >> 36266455

A comprehensive evaluation of polygenic score and genotype imputation performances of human SNP arrays in diverse populations.

Dat Thanh Nguyen1,2, Trang T H Tran3,4, Mai Hoang Tran3,4, Khai Tran3, Duy Pham5, Nguyen Thuy Duong3,4,6, Quan Nguyen7, Nam S Vo8,9.   

Abstract

Regardless of the overwhelming use of next-generation sequencing technologies, microarray-based genotyping combined with the imputation of untyped variants remains a cost-effective means to interrogate genetic variations across the human genome. This technology is widely used in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) at bio-bank scales, and more recently, in polygenic score (PGS) analysis to predict and stratify disease risk. Over the last decade, human genotyping arrays have undergone a tremendous growth in both number and content making a comprehensive evaluation of their performances became more important. Here, we performed a comprehensive performance assessment for 23 available human genotyping arrays in 6 ancestry groups using diverse public and in-house datasets. The analyses focus on performance estimation of derived imputation (in terms of accuracy and coverage) and PGS (in terms of concordance to PGS estimated from whole-genome sequencing data) in three different traits and diseases. We found that the arrays with a higher number of SNPs are not necessarily the ones with higher imputation performance, but the arrays that are well-optimized for the targeted population could provide very good imputation performance. In addition, PGS estimated by imputed SNP array data is highly correlated to PGS estimated by whole-genome sequencing data in most cases. When optimal arrays are used, the correlations of PGS between two types of data are higher than 0.97, but interestingly, arrays with high density can result in lower PGS performance. Our results suggest the importance of properly selecting a suitable genotyping array for PGS applications. Finally, we developed a web tool that provides interactive analyses of tag SNP contents and imputation performance based on population and genomic regions of interest. This study would act as a practical guide for researchers to design their genotyping arrays-based studies. The tool is available at: https://genome.vinbigdata.org/tools/saa/ .
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36266455      PMCID: PMC9585077          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-22215-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.996


  46 in total

1.  CrossMap: a versatile tool for coordinate conversion between genome assemblies.

Authors:  Hao Zhao; Zhifu Sun; Jing Wang; Haojie Huang; Jean-Pierre Kocher; Liguo Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  The variant call format and VCFtools.

Authors:  Petr Danecek; Adam Auton; Goncalo Abecasis; Cornelis A Albers; Eric Banks; Mark A DePristo; Robert E Handsaker; Gerton Lunter; Gabor T Marth; Stephen T Sherry; Gilean McVean; Richard Durbin
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 3.  Polygenic risk scores: from research tools to clinical instruments.

Authors:  Cathryn M Lewis; Evangelos Vassos
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 11.117

4.  Genome-wide association analyses identify 143 risk variants and putative regulatory mechanisms for type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Angli Xue; Yang Wu; Zhihong Zhu; Futao Zhang; Kathryn E Kemper; Zhili Zheng; Loic Yengo; Luke R Lloyd-Jones; Julia Sidorenko; Yeda Wu; Allan F McRae; Peter M Visscher; Jian Zeng; Jian Yang
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  The NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog of published genome-wide association studies, targeted arrays and summary statistics 2019.

Authors:  Annalisa Buniello; Jacqueline A L MacArthur; Maria Cerezo; Laura W Harris; James Hayhurst; Cinzia Malangone; Aoife McMahon; Joannella Morales; Edward Mountjoy; Elliot Sollis; Daniel Suveges; Olga Vrousgou; Patricia L Whetzel; Ridwan Amode; Jose A Guillen; Harpreet S Riat; Stephen J Trevanion; Peggy Hall; Heather Junkins; Paul Flicek; Tony Burdett; Lucia A Hindorff; Fiona Cunningham; Helen Parkinson
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Improved imputation of low-frequency and rare variants using the UK10K haplotype reference panel.

Authors:  Jie Huang; Bryan Howie; Shane McCarthy; Yasin Memari; Klaudia Walter; Josine L Min; Petr Danecek; Giovanni Malerba; Elisabetta Trabetti; Hou-Feng Zheng; Giovanni Gambaro; J Brent Richards; Richard Durbin; Nicholas J Timpson; Jonathan Marchini; Nicole Soranzo
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 14.919

7.  A tutorial on conducting genome-wide association studies: Quality control and statistical analysis.

Authors:  Andries T Marees; Hilde de Kluiver; Sven Stringer; Florence Vorspan; Emmanuel Curis; Cynthia Marie-Claire; Eske M Derks
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.035

8.  Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations.

Authors:  Amit V Khera; Mark Chaffin; Krishna G Aragam; Mary E Haas; Carolina Roselli; Seung Hoan Choi; Pradeep Natarajan; Eric S Lander; Steven A Lubitz; Patrick T Ellinor; Sekar Kathiresan
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 38.330

9.  Genotype imputation and variability in polygenic risk score estimation.

Authors:  Shang-Fu Chen; Raquel Dias; Doug Evans; Elias L Salfati; Shuchen Liu; Nathan E Wineinger; Ali Torkamani
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 11.117

10.  A comparison of genotyping arrays.

Authors:  Joost A M Verlouw; Eva Clemens; Jard H de Vries; Oliver Zolk; Annemieke J M H Verkerk; Antoinette Am Zehnhoff-Dinnesen; Carolina Medina-Gomez; Claudia Lanvers-Kaminsky; Fernando Rivadeneira; Thorsten Langer; Joyce B J van Meurs; Marry M van den Heuvel-Eibrink; André G Uitterlinden; Linda Broer
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 4.246

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.