Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Nov 29;5 Suppl 9(Suppl 9):S59.
doi: 10.1186/1753-6561-5-S9-S59.

Resampling procedures to identify important SNPs using a consensus approach

Affiliations

Resampling procedures to identify important SNPs using a consensus approach

Christopher Pardy et al. BMC Proc. .

Abstract

Our goal is to identify common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (minor allele frequency > 1%) that add predictive accuracy above that gained by knowledge of easily measured clinical variables. We take an algorithmic approach to predict each phenotypic variable using a combination of phenotypic and genotypic predictors. We perform our procedure on the first simulated replicate and then validate against the others. Our procedure performs well when predicting Q1 but is less successful for the other outcomes. We use resampling procedures where possible to guard against false positives and to improve generalizability. The approach is based on finding a consensus regarding important SNPs by applying random forests and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) on multiple subsamples. Random forests are used first to discard unimportant predictors, narrowing our focus to roughly 100 important SNPs. A cross-validation LASSO is then used to further select variables. We combine these procedures to guarantee that cross-validation can be used to choose a shrinkage parameter for the LASSO. If the clinical variables were unavailable, this prefiltering step would be essential. We perform the SNP-based analyses simultaneously rather than one at a time to estimate SNP effects in the presence of other causal variants. We analyzed the first simulated replicate of Genetic Analysis Workshop 17 without knowledge of the true model. Post-conference knowledge of the simulation parameters allowed us to investigate the limitations of our approach. We found that many of the false positives we identified were substantially correlated with genuine causal SNPs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
LASSO cross-validation plots for affected status. Cross validation fails to identify an appropriate shrinkage parameter by using just the 4,755 SNPs (left-hand panel). A parameter can be chosen when there is additional adjustment for clinical variables (center panel) or when SNPs are prefiltered according to random forest importance score.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Outline of our approach

References

    1. Humphries SE, Ridker PM, Talmud PJ. Genetic testing for cardiovascular disease susceptibility: a useful clinical management tool or possible misinformation? Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004;24:628. doi: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000116216.56511.39. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Breiman L. Random forests. Machine Learning. 2001;45:5–32. doi: 10.1023/A:1010933404324. - DOI
    1. Dasgupta A, Sun YV, Konig IR, Bailey-Wilson JE, Malley JD. Brief review of machine learning methods in genetic epidemiology: the GAW17 experience. Genet Epidemiol. 2011;X(suppl X):X–X. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Breiman L. Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Stat Sci. 2001;16:199–231. (with comments and a rejoinder by the author)
    1. Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MAR, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PIW, Daly MJ. et al.PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am J Hum Genet. 2007;81:559–575. doi: 10.1086/519795. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources