Statistical method for modeling sequencing data from different technologies in longitudinal studies with application to Huntington disease.

Advancement of gene expression measurements in longitudinal studies enables the identification of genes associated with disease severity over time. However, problems arise when the technology used to measure gene expression differs between time points. Observed differences between the results obtained at different time points can be caused by technical differences. Modeling the two measurements jointly over time might provide insight into the causes of these different results. Our work is motivated by a study of gene expression data of blood samples from Huntington disease patients, which were obtained using two different sequencing technologies. At time point 1, DeepSAGE technology was used to measure the gene expression, with a subsample also measured using RNA-Seq technology. At time point 2, all samples were measured using RNA-Seq technology. Significant associations between gene expression measured by DeepSAGE and disease severity using data from the first time point could not be replicated by the RNA-Seq data from the second time point. We modeled the relationship between the two sequencing technologies using the data from the overlapping samples. We used linear mixed models with either DeepSAGE or RNA-Seq measurements as the dependent variable and disease severity as the independent variable. In conclusion, (1) for one out of 14 genes, the initial significant result could be replicated with both technologies using data from both time points; (2) statistical efficiency is lost due to disagreement between the two technologies, measurement error when predicting gene expressions, and the need to include additional parameters to account for possible differences.

Application of novel and existing methods to identify genes with evidence of epigenetic association: results from GAW20.

BACKGROUND: The rise in popularity and accessibility of DNA methylation data to evaluate epigenetic associations with disease has led to numerous methodological questions. As part of GAW20, our working group of 8 research groups focused on gene searching methods. RESULTS: Although the methods were varied, we identified 3 main themes within our group. First, many groups tackled the question of how best to use pedigree information in downstream analyses, finding that (a) the use of kinship matrices is common practice, (b) ascertainment corrections may be necessary, and (c) pedigree information may be useful for identifying parent-of-origin effects. Second, many groups also considered multimarker versus single-marker tests. Multimarker tests had modestly improved power versus single-marker methods on simulated data, and on real data identified additional associations that were not identified with single-marker methods, including identification of a gene with a strong biological interpretation. Finally, some of the groups explored methods to combine single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and DNA methylation into a single association analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A causal inference method showed promise at discovering new mechanisms of SNP activity; gene-based methods of summarizing SNP and DNA methylation data also showed promise. Even though numerous questions still remain in the analysis of DNA methylation data, our discussions at GAW20 suggest some emerging best practices.

Estimation of the effect of surrogate multi-omic biomarkers.

Multiple technologies which measure the same omics data set but are based on different aspects of the molecules exist. In practice, studies use different technologies and have therefore different biomarkers. An example is the glycan age index, which is constructed by three different ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) IgG glycans, and is a biomarker for biological age. A second technology is liquid chromatography- mass spectrometry (LCMS). To estimate the effect of a biomarker on an outcome variable, two issues need to be addressed. Firstly, a measurement error is needed to map one technology to the other one using a calibration study. Here, we consider two approaches, namely one based on the chemical properties of the two technologies and one based on the estimation of this relationship using O2PLS. Secondly, the use of an approximation of the biomarker in the main study needs to be taken into account by use of a regression calibration method. The performance of the two approaches is studied via simulations. The methods are used to estimate the relationship between glycan age and menopause. We have data from two cohorts, namely Korcula and Vis. In conclusion, (1) both measurement error models give similar results and suggest that there is an association between the glycan age index and the menopause status, (2) the chemical mapping approach outperforms O2PLS in the low measurement error variance, while on the larger measurement error variance, O2PLS works better, (3) statistical efficiency is lost due to increased noise level by adding irrelevant information.

Genome-wide analysis in multiple-case families: assessing the relationship between triglyceride and methylation.

The main goal of this paper is to estimate the effect of triglyceride levels on methylation of cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) sites in multiple-case families. These families are selected because they have 2 or more cases of metabolic syndrome (primary phenotype). The methylations at the CpG sites are the secondary phenotypes. Ascertainment corrections are needed when there is an association between the primary and secondary phenotype. We will apply the newly developed secondary phenotype analysis for multiple-case family studies to identify CpG sites where methylations are influenced by triglyceride levels. Our second goal is to compare the performance of the naïve approach, which ignores the sampling of the families, SOLAR (Sequential Oligogenic Linkage Analysis Routines), which adjusts for ascertainment via probands, and the secondary phenotype approach. The analysis of possible CpG sites associated with triglyceride levels shows results consistent with the literature when using the secondary phenotype approach. Overall, the secondary phenotype approach performed well, but the comparison of the different approaches does not show significant differences between them. However, for genome-wide applications, we recommend using the secondary phenotype approach when there is an association between primary and secondary phenotypes, and to use the naïve approach otherwise.