bioRxivGenetics
Quantifying the extent to which index event biases influence large genetic association studies
Hanieh YaghootkariD, Michael Bancks, Sam Jones, Aaron McDaid, Robin Beaumont, Louise Donnelly, Andrew Wood, Archie CampbelliD, Jessica TyrrelliD, Lynne Hocking, Marcus Tuke, Katherine Ruth, Ewan Pearson, Anna MurrayiD, Rachel Freathy, Patricia Munroe, Caroline HaywardiD, Colin PalmeriD, Michael Weedon, James Pankow, Timothy Frayling, Zoltan Kutalik
Abstract
As genetic association studies increase in size to 100,000s of individuals, subtle biases may influence conclusions. One possible bias is \"index event bias\" (IEB), also called \"collider bias\", caused by the stratification by, or enrichment for, disease status when testing associations between gene variants and a disease-associated trait. We first provided a statistical framework for quantifying IEB then identified real examples of IEB in a range of study and analytical designs. We observed evidence of biased associations for some disease alleles and genetic risk scores, even in population-based studies. For example, a genetic risk score consisting of type 2 diabetes variants was associated with lower BMI in 113,203 type 2 diabetes controls from the population based UK Biobank study (-0.010 SDs BMI per allele, P=5E-4), entirely driven by IEB. Three of 11 individual type 2 diabetes risk alleles, and 10 of 25 hypertension alleles were associated with lower BMI at p<0.05 in UK Biobank when analyzing disease free individuals only, of which six hypertension alleles remained associated at p<0.05 after correction for IEB. Our analysis suggested that the associations between CCND2 and TCF7L2 diabetes risk alleles and BMI could (at least partially) be explained by IEB. Variants remaining associated after correction may be pleiotropic and include those in CYP17A1 (allele associated with hypertension risk and lower BMI). In conclusion, IEB may result in false positive or negative associations in very large studies stratified or strongly enriched for/against disease cases.
- organism: human
- assay: GWAS summary statistics
- research focus: GWAS / association mapping
- approach: statistical model
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Common genetic variants and health outcomes appear geographically structured in the UK Biobank sample: Old concerns returning and their implications.
Simon J. Haworth, Ruth E. Mitchell, … Nicholas John Timpson·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Jan 18, 2019
- Response to Problems in interpreting and using GWAS of conditional phenotypes illustrated by alcohol GWAS
Toni‐Kim Clarke, Andrew Mark McIntosh·bioRxiv·Mar 30, 2018
- Correcting for volunteer bias in GWAS uncovers novel genetic variants and increases heritability estimates
Sjoerd van Alten, Benjamin W. Domingue, … Andries T. Marees·medRxiv·Nov 10, 2022
- Slope-Hunter: A robust method for index-event bias correction in genome-wide association studies of subsequent traits
Osama Mahmoud, Frank Dudbridge, … Kate M. Tilling·bioRxiv·Jan 31, 2020
- Correction for participation bias in the UK Biobank reveals non-negligible impact on genetic associations and downstream analyses
Tabea Schoeler, Doug Speed, … Zoltán Kutalik·Nature Human BehaviourPeer-reviewed·Apr 27, 2023
- Pitfalls in performing genome-wide association studies on ratio traits
Zachary Ryan McCaw, Rounak Dey, … Thomas W. Soare·Human Genetics and Genomics AdvancesPeer-reviewed·Jan 15, 2025