Accurate modeling of replication rates in genome-wide association studies by accounting for Winner's Curse and study-specific heterogeneity

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified thousands of genetic variants associated with complex human traits, but only a fraction of variants identified in discovery studies achieve significance in replication studies. Replication in genome-wide association studies has been well-studied in the context of Winner's Curse, which is the inflation of effect size estimates for significant variants due to statistical chance. However, Winner's Curse is often not sufficient to explain lack of replication. Another reason why studies fail to replicate is that there are fundamental differences between the discovery and replication studies. A confounding factor can create the appearance of a significant finding while actually being an artifact that will not replicate in future studies. We propose a statistical framework that utilizes genome-wide association studies and replication studies to jointly model Winner's Curse and study-specific heterogeneity due to confounding factors. We apply this framework to 100 genome-wide association studies from the Human Genome-Wide Association Studies Catalog and observe that there is a large range in the level of estimated confounding. We demonstrate how this framework can be used to distinguish when studies fail to replicate due to statistical noise and when they fail due to confounding.

Analysis of independent cohorts of outbred CFW mice reveals novel loci for behavioral and physiological traits and identifies factors determining reproducibility

Combining samples for genetic association is standard practice in human genetic analysis of complex traits, but is rarely undertaken in rodent genetics. Here, using 23 phenotypes and genotypes from two independent laboratories, we obtained a sample size of 3076 commercially available outbred mice and identified 70 loci, more than double the number of loci identified in the component studies. Fine-mapping in the combined sample reduced the number of likely causal variants, with a median reduction in set size of 51%, and indicated novel gene associations, including Pnpo, Ttll6, and GM11545 with bone mineral density, and Psmb9 with weight. However, replication at a nominal threshold of 0.05 between the two component studies was low, with less than one-third of loci identified in one study replicated in the second. In addition to overestimates in the effect size in the discovery sample (Winner's Curse), we also found that heterogeneity between studies explained the poor replication, but the contribution of these two factors varied among traits. Leveraging these observations, we integrated information about replication rates, study-specific heterogeneity, and Winner's Curse corrected estimates of power to assign variants to one of four confidence levels. Our approach addresses concerns about reproducibility and demonstrates how to obtain robust results from mapping complex traits in any genome-wide association study.