MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3009090505 · doi:10.1101/2020.03.04.977389

Identifying loci with different allele frequencies among cases of eight psychiatric disorders using CC-GWAS

2020· preprint· en· W3009090505 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wouter J. Peyrot, Alkes L. Price

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeGovernment of CanadaCancer Research UKNational Institutes of HealthEuropean CommissionCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome Canada
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyAlleleSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Allele frequencyGeneticsGenetic associationBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismMedicinePsychiatryGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Psychiatric disorders are highly genetically correlated, and many studies have focused on their shared genetic components. However, little research has been conducted on the genetic differences between psychiatric disorders, because case-case comparisons of allele frequencies among cases currently require individual-level data from cases of both disorders. We developed a new method (CC-GWAS) to test for differences in allele frequency among cases of two different disorders using summary statistics from the respective case-control GWAS; CC-GWAS relies on analytical assessments of the genetic distance between cases and controls of each disorder. Simulations and analytical computations confirm that CC-GWAS is well-powered and attains effective control of type I error. In particular, CC-GWAS identifies and discards false positive associations that can arise due to differential tagging of a shared causal SNP (with the same allele frequency in cases of both disorders), e.g. due to subtle differences in ancestry between the input case-control studies. We applied CC-GWAS to publicly available summary statistics for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, and identified 116 independent genome-wide significant loci distinguishing these three disorders, including 21 CC-GWAS-specific loci that were not genome-wide significant in the input case-control summary statistics. Two of the CC-GWAS-specific loci implicate the genes KLF6 and KLF16 from the Kruppel-like family of transcription factors; these genes have been linked to neurite outgrowth and axon regeneration. We performed a broader set of case-case comparisons by additionally analyzing ADHD, anorexia nervosa, autism, obsessive-compulsive disorder and Tourette’s Syndrome, yielding a total of 196 independent loci distinguishing eight psychiatric disorders, including 72 CC-GWAS-specific loci. We confirmed that loci identified by CC-GWAS replicated convincingly in applications to data sets for which independent replication data were available. In conclusion, CC-GWAS robustly identifies loci with different allele frequencies among cases of different disorders using results from the respective case-control GWAS, providing new insights into the genetic differences between eight psychiatric disorders.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→