Paper detail

Maximizing the Power of Principal Components Analysis of Correlated Phenotypes in Genome-wide Association Studies

Principal Component analysis (PCA) is a useful statistical technique that is commonly used for multivariate analysis of correlated variables. It is usually applied as a dimension reduction method: the top principal components (PCs) explaining most of total variance are tested for association with a predictor of interest, and the remaining PCs are ignored. This strategy has been widely applied in genetic epidemiology, however some of its aspects are not well appreciated in the context of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) association testing. In this study, we review the theoretical basis of PCA and its behavior when testing for association between a SNP and two correlated traits under various scenarios. We then evaluate with simulations the power of several different PCA-based strategies when analyzing up to 100 correlated traits. We show that contrary to widespread practice that testing the top PCs only can be dramatically underpowered since PCs explaining a low amount of the total phenotypic variance can harbor substantial genetic associations. Furthermore, we demonstrate that PC-based strategies that use all PCs have great potential to detect negatively pleiotropic genetic variants (e.g. variants with opposite effects on positively correlated traits) and genetic variants that are exclusively associated with a single trait, but only achieve a moderate gain in power to detect positive pleiotropic genetic loci. Finally, the genome-wide association study of five correlated coagulation traits in 685 subjects from the MARTHA study confirms these results. The joint analysis of the five PCs from the coagulation traits identified two new candidate SNPs, which were most strongly associated with the 5th PC that explained the smallest amount of phenotypic variance.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.