Two-phase designs for joint quantitative-trait-dependent and genotype-dependent sampling in post-GWAS regional sequencing

Two-phase designs with current status data

We consider the design and analysis of two-phase studies aiming to assess the relation between a fixed (eg, genetic) marker and an event time under current status observation. We consider a common setting in which a phase I sample is comprised of a large cohort of individuals with outcome (ie, current status) data and a vector of inexpensive covariates. Stored biospecimens for individuals in the phase I sample can be assayed to record the marker of interest for individuals selected in a phase II sub-sample. The design challenge is then to select the phase II sub-sample in order to maximize the precision of the marker effect on the time of interest under a proportional hazards model. This problem has not been examined before for current status data and the role of the assessment time is highlighted. Inference based on likelihood and inverse probability weighted estimating functions are considered, with designs centered on score-based residuals, extreme current status observations, or stratified sampling schemes. Data from a registry of patients with psoriatic arthritis is used in an illustration where we study the risk of diabetes as a comorbidity.

Two-phase sample selection strategies for design and analysis in post-genome-wide association fine-mapping studies

Post-GWAS analysis, in many cases, focuses on fine-mapping targeted genetic regions discovered at GWAS-stage; that is, the aim is to pinpoint potential causal variants and susceptibility genes for complex traits and disease outcomes using next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies. Large-scale GWAS cohorts are necessary to identify target regions given the typically modest genetic effect sizes. In this context, two-phase sampling design and analysis is a cost-reduction technique that utilizes data collected during phase 1 GWAS to select an informative subsample for phase 2 sequencing. The main goal is to make inference for genetic variants measured via NGS by efficiently combining data from phases 1 and 2. We propose two approaches for selecting a phase 2 design under a budget constraint. The first method identifies sampling fractions that select a phase 2 design yielding an asymptotic variance covariance matrix with certain optimal characteristics, for example, smallest trace, via Lagrange multipliers (LM). The second relies on a genetic algorithm (GA) with a defined fitness function to identify exactly a phase 2 subsample. We perform comprehensive simulation studies to evaluate the empirical properties of the proposed designs for a genetic association study of a quantitative trait. We compare our methods against two ranked designs: residual-dependent sampling and a recently identified optimal design. Our findings demonstrate that the proposed designs, GA in particular, can render competitive power in combined phase 1 and 2 analysis compared with alternative designs while preserving type 1 error control. These results are especially evident under the more practical scenario where design values need to be defined a priori and are subject to misspecification. We illustrate the proposed methods in a study of triglyceride levels in the North Finland Birth Cohort of 1966. R code to reproduce our results is available at github.com/egosv/TwoPhase_postGWAS.

Estimating Additive Interaction Effect in Stratified Two-Phase Case-Control Design

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is considerable interest in epidemiology to estimate an additive interaction effect between two risk factors in case-control studies. An additive interaction is defined as the differential reduction in absolute risk associated with one factor between different levels of the other factor. A stratified two-phase case-control design is commonly used in epidemiology to reduce the cost of assembling covariates. It is crucial to obtain valid estimates of the model parameters by accounting for the underlying stratification scheme to obtain accurate and precise estimates of additive interaction effects. The aim of this paper is to examine the properties of different methods for estimating model parameters and additive interaction effects under a stratified two-phase case-control design.

METHODS

Using simulations, we investigate the properties of three existing methods, namely stratum-specific offset, inverse-probability weighting, and multiple imputation for estimating model parameters and additive interaction effects. We also illustrate these properties using data from two published epidemiology studies.

RESULTS

Simulation studies show that the multiple imputation method performs well when both the true and analysis models are additive (i.e., does not include multiplicative interaction terms) but does not provide a discernible advantage over the offset method when the analysis models are non-additive (i.e., includes multiplicative interaction terms). The offset method exhibits the best overall properties when the analysis model contains multiplicative interaction effects.

CONCLUSION

When estimating additive interaction between risk factors in stratified two-phase case-control studies, we recommend estimating model parameters using multiple imputation when the analysis model is additive, and we recommend the offset method when the analysis model is non-additive.

Two-phase designs for joint quantitative-trait-dependent and genotype-dependent sampling in post-GWAS regional sequencing

We evaluate two‐phase designs to follow‐up findings from genome‐wide association study (GWAS) when the cost of regional sequencing in the entire cohort is prohibitive. We develop novel expectation‐maximization‐based inference under a semiparametric maximum likelihood formulation tailored for post‐GWAS inference. A GWAS‐SNP (where SNP is single nucleotide polymorphism) serves as a surrogate covariate in inferring association between a sequence variant and a normally distributed quantitative trait (QT). We assess test validity and quantify efficiency and power of joint QT‐SNP‐dependent sampling and analysis under alternative sample allocations by simulations. Joint allocation balanced on SNP genotype and extreme‐QT strata yields significant power improvements compared to marginal QT‐ or SNP‐based allocations. We illustrate the proposed method and evaluate the sensitivity of sample allocation to sampling variation using data from a sequencing study of systolic blood pressure.