A Bayes factor approach with informative prior for rare genetic variant analysis from next generation sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery of rare genetic variants through next generation sequencing is a very challenging issue in the field of human genetics. We propose a novel region-based statistical approach based on a Bayes Factor (BF) to assess evidence of association between a set of rare variants (RVs) located on the same genomic region and a disease outcome in the context of case-control design. Marginal likelihoods are computed under the null and alternative hypotheses assuming a binomial distribution for the RV count in the region and a beta or mixture of Dirac and beta prior distribution for the probability of RV. We derive the theoretical null distribution of the BF under our prior setting and show that a Bayesian control of the false Discovery Rate can be obtained for genome-wide inference. Informative priors are introduced using prior evidence of association from a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test statistic. We use our simulation program, sim1000G, to generate RV data similar to the 1000 genomes sequencing project. Our simulation studies showed that the new BF statistic outperforms standard methods (SKAT, SKAT-O, Burden test) in case-control studies with moderate sample sizes and is equivalent to them under large sample size scenarios. Our real data application to a lung cancer case-control study found enrichment for RVs in known and novel cancer genes. It also suggests that using the BF with informative prior improves the overall gene discovery compared to the BF with noninformative prior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".