IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0249305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of variant-level batch effects on identification of genetic risk factors in large sequencing studies

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel P Wickland
  • Yingxue Ren
  • Jason P Sinnwell
  • Joseph S Reddy
  • Cyril Pottier
  • Vivekananda Sarangi
  • Minerva M Carrasquillo
  • Owen A Ross
  • Steven G Younkin
  • Nilüfer Ertekin-Taner
  • Rosa Rademakers
  • Matthew E Hudson
  • Liudmila Sergeevna Mainzer
  • Joanna M Biernacka
  • Yan W Asmann

Abstract

Genetic studies have shifted to sequencing-based rare variants discovery after decades of success in identifying common disease variants by Genome-Wide Association Studies using Single Nucleotide Polymorphism chips. Sequencing-based studies require large sample sizes for statistical power and therefore often inadvertently introduce batch effects because samples are typically collected, processed, and sequenced at multiple centers. Conventionally, batch effects are first detected and visualized using Principal Components Analysis and then controlled by including batch covariates in the disease association models. For sequencing-based genetic studies, because all variants included in the association analyses have passed sequencing-related quality control measures, this conventional approach treats every variant as equal and ignores the substantial differences still remaining in variant qualities and characteristics such as genotype quality scores, alternative allele fractions (fraction of reads supporting alternative allele at a variant position) and sequencing depths. In the Alzheimer’s Disease Sequencing Project (ADSP) exome dataset of 9,904 cases and controls, we discovered hidden variant-level differences between sample batches of three sequencing centers and two exome capture kits. Although sequencing centers were included as a covariate in our association models, we observed differences at the variant level in genotype quality and alternative allele fraction between samples processed by different exome capture kits that significantly impacted both the confidence of variant detection and the identification of disease-associated variants. Furthermore, we found that a subset of top disease-risk variants came exclusively from samples processed by one exome capture kit that was more effective at capturing the alternative alleles compared to the other kit. Our findings highlight the importance of additional variant-level quality control for large sequencing-based genetic studies. More importantly, we demonstrate that automatically filtering out variants with batch differences may lead to false negatives if the batch discordances come largely from quality differences and if the batch-specific variants have better quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel P Wickland & Yingxue Ren & Jason P Sinnwell & Joseph S Reddy & Cyril Pottier & Vivekananda Sarangi & Minerva M Carrasquillo & Owen A Ross & Steven G Younkin & Nilüfer Ertekin-Taner & Rosa Radem, 2021. "Impact of variant-level batch effects on identification of genetic risk factors in large sequencing studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-16, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0249305
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249305
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249305&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0249305?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0249305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.