Fine-mapping across diverse ancestries drives the discovery of putative causal variants underlying human complex traits and diseases
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1038/s41588-024-01870-z
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of human complex traits or diseases often implicate genetic loci that span hundreds or thousands of genetic variants, many of which have similar statistical significance. While statistical fine-mapping in individuals of European ancestries has made important discoveries, cross-population fine-mapping has the potential to improve power and resolution by capitalizing on the genomic diversity across ancestries. Here we present SuSiEx, an accurate and computationally efficient method for cross-population fine-mapping, which builds on the single-population fine-mapping framework, Sum of Single Effects (SuSiE). SuSiEx integrates data from an arbitrary number of ancestries, explicitly models population-specific allele frequencies and LD patterns, accounts for multiple causal variants in a genomic region, and can be applied to GWAS summary statistics. We comprehensively evaluated SuSiEx using simulations, a range of quantitative traits measured in both UK Biobank and Taiwan Biobank, and schizophrenia GWAS across East Asian and European ancestries. In all evaluations, SuSiEx fine-mapped more association signals, produced smaller credible sets and higher posterior inclusion probability (PIP) for putative causal variants, and captured population-specific causal variants.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
From the seven associated loci, fine-mapping identified 8 credible sets in the EAS GWAS and 13 credible sets in the cross-population GWAS.
“From the seven associated loci, we identified 8 credible sets in the EAS GWAS fine-mapping and 13 credible sets in the cross-population GWAS fine-mapping”
From Shared genetic architectures of educational attainment in East Asian and European populations (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
The Methods section describes EAS and cross-population fine-mapping, but does not report results for seven associated loci. The Results sections report different aggregate counts; searches for “seven associated loci,” “8 credible sets,” and “13 credible sets” found no passage supporting the citing authors’ specific counts. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 49 · Cited by 94
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [29]Ulirsch J. C. & Kanai M. An annotated atlas of causal variants underlying complex traits and gene expression. Under review.
- Authors
- Yuan, K., Longchamps, R. J., Pardiñas, A. F., Yu, M., Chen, T.-T., Lin, S.-C., Chen, Y., Lam, M., Liu, R., Xia, Y., Guo, Z., Shi, W., Shen, C., The Schizophrenia Workgroup of Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Daly, M. J., Neale, B. M., Feng, Y.-C. A., Lin, Y.-F., Chen, C.-Y., O’Donovan, M., Ge, T., & Huang, H.
- Affiliations
- Broad Institute (US)
- Cardiff University (GB)
- National Health Research Institutes (TW)
- Northwell Health (US)
- Digital China Health (China) (CN)
- National Taiwan University (TW)
- Biogen (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ge, Tian
- Huang, Hailiang
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature Genetics
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2023-01-09
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1841-1850
- ISSN
- 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9882563
- OpenAlex
- W4401888878
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 7
- FWCI
- 23.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- NHRI Institutional Repository (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (R01MH130675)
- Academy of Medical Sciences (SBF005\\1083)
- Cardiff University (MR/L010305/1, MC_PC_17212, MR/L011794/1)
- Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST109-2314-B400-017)
- National Health Research Institutes (112-PP-09, NP-110)
- Ono Pharmaceutical
- National Science and Technology Council (112-2314-B-002-200-MY3, MOST 109-)
- Gillings School of Public Health
- Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute
- Medical Research Council (MR/L011794/1, MC_PC_17212, MR/P005748/1, MR/L010305/1, MC_PC_17228, MR/L011794)
- National Institute of Mental Health (U01MH109539, R01MH130675, R37MH107649, R01MH101244)
- National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG012354)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K01DK114379, P30DK043351, R01DK129364)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
- Keywords
- fine mapping, causal variants, complex traits, genetic ancestry, linkage disequilibrium, GWAS summary statistics, schizophrenia, East Asian ancestry, UK Biobank, Taiwan Biobank, credible sets
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