Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 917

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Opportunities and challenges for transcriptome-wide association studies

Open access
Wainberg, Michael, Sinnott-Armstrong, Nasa, Mancuso, Nicholas, Barbeira, Alvaro N., Knowles, David A., Golan, David, Ermel, Raili, Ruusalepp, Arno, Quertermous, Thomas, Hao, Ke, Björkegren, Johan L. M., Im, Hae Kyung, Pasaniuc, Bogdan, Rivas, Manuel A., Kundaje, Anshul·2019·Nature Genetics

Abstract

Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) integrate genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and gene expression datasets to identify gene–trait associations. In this Perspective, we explore properties of TWAS as a potential approach to prioritize causal genes at GWAS loci, by using simulations and case studies of literature-curated candidate causal genes for schizophrenia, low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and Crohn’s disease. We explore risk loci where TWAS accurately prioritizes the likely causal gene as well as loci where TWAS prioritizes multiple genes, some likely to be non-causal, owing to sharing of expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL). TWAS is especially prone to spurious prioritization with expression data from non-trait-related tissues or cell types, owing to substantial cross-cell-type variation in expression levels and eQTL strengths. Nonetheless, TWAS prioritizes candidate causal genes more accurately than simple baselines. We suggest best practices for causal-gene prioritization with TWAS and discuss future opportunities for improvement. Our results showcase the strengths and limitations of using eQTL datasets to determine causal genes at GWAS loci. Transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) prioritize candidate causal genes at GWAS loci. This Perspective discusses the challenges to TWAS analysis, caveats to interpretation of results and opportunities for improvements to this class of methods.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41588-019-0385-z

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 917

Metadata

Authors
Wainberg, M., Sinnott-Armstrong, N., Mancuso, N., Barbeira, A. N., Knowles, D. A., Golan, D., Ermel, R., Ruusalepp, A., Quertermous, T., Hao, K., Björkegren, J. L. M., Im, H. K., Pasaniuc, B., Rivas, M. A., & Kundaje, A.
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2019-03-29
Volume
51
Issue
4
Pages
592-599
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W2934861239
Cited by
917
References
26
FWCI
56.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Opportunities and challenges for transcriptome-wide association studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41588-019-0385-z
The paper
Wainberg, M., Sinnott-Armstrong, N., Mancuso, N., Barbeira, A. N., Knowles, D. A., Golan, D., Ermel, R., Ruusalepp, A., Quertermous, T., Hao, K., Björkegren, J. L. M., Im, H. K., Pasaniuc, B., Rivas, M. A., & Kundaje, A. (2019). Opportunities and challenges for transcriptome-wide association studies. Nature Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0385-z

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.