Cargando…
Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design
BACKGROUND: CpG methylation levels can help to explain inter-individual differences in phenotypic traits. Few studies have explored whether identifying probe subsets based on their biological and statistical properties can maximise predictions whilst minimising array content. Variance component anal...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9367152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35948928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13148-022-01320-9 |
_version_ | 1784765724093317120 |
---|---|
author | Hillary, Robert F. McCartney, Daniel L. McRae, Allan F. Campbell, Archie Walker, Rosie M. Hayward, Caroline Horvath, Steve Porteous, David J. Evans, Kathryn L. Marioni, Riccardo E. |
author_facet | Hillary, Robert F. McCartney, Daniel L. McRae, Allan F. Campbell, Archie Walker, Rosie M. Hayward, Caroline Horvath, Steve Porteous, David J. Evans, Kathryn L. Marioni, Riccardo E. |
author_sort | Hillary, Robert F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: CpG methylation levels can help to explain inter-individual differences in phenotypic traits. Few studies have explored whether identifying probe subsets based on their biological and statistical properties can maximise predictions whilst minimising array content. Variance component analyses and penalised regression (epigenetic predictors) were used to test the influence of (i) the number of probes considered, (ii) mean probe variability and (iii) methylation QTL status on the variance captured in eighteen traits by blood DNA methylation. Training and test samples comprised ≤ 4450 and ≤ 2578 unrelated individuals from Generation Scotland, respectively. RESULTS: As the number of probes under consideration decreased, so too did the estimates from variance components and prediction analyses. Methylation QTL status and mean probe variability did not influence variance components. However, relative effect sizes were 15% larger for epigenetic predictors based on probes with known or reported methylation QTLs compared to probes without reported methylation QTLs. Relative effect sizes were 45% larger for predictors based on probes with mean Beta-values between 10 and 90% compared to those based on hypo- or hypermethylated probes (Beta-value ≤ 10% or ≥ 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Arrays with fewer probes could reduce costs, leading to increased sample sizes for analyses. Our results show that reducing array content can restrict prediction metrics and careful attention must be given to the biological and distribution properties of CpG probes in array content selection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13148-022-01320-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9367152 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93671522022-08-12 Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design Hillary, Robert F. McCartney, Daniel L. McRae, Allan F. Campbell, Archie Walker, Rosie M. Hayward, Caroline Horvath, Steve Porteous, David J. Evans, Kathryn L. Marioni, Riccardo E. Clin Epigenetics Research BACKGROUND: CpG methylation levels can help to explain inter-individual differences in phenotypic traits. Few studies have explored whether identifying probe subsets based on their biological and statistical properties can maximise predictions whilst minimising array content. Variance component analyses and penalised regression (epigenetic predictors) were used to test the influence of (i) the number of probes considered, (ii) mean probe variability and (iii) methylation QTL status on the variance captured in eighteen traits by blood DNA methylation. Training and test samples comprised ≤ 4450 and ≤ 2578 unrelated individuals from Generation Scotland, respectively. RESULTS: As the number of probes under consideration decreased, so too did the estimates from variance components and prediction analyses. Methylation QTL status and mean probe variability did not influence variance components. However, relative effect sizes were 15% larger for epigenetic predictors based on probes with known or reported methylation QTLs compared to probes without reported methylation QTLs. Relative effect sizes were 45% larger for predictors based on probes with mean Beta-values between 10 and 90% compared to those based on hypo- or hypermethylated probes (Beta-value ≤ 10% or ≥ 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Arrays with fewer probes could reduce costs, leading to increased sample sizes for analyses. Our results show that reducing array content can restrict prediction metrics and careful attention must be given to the biological and distribution properties of CpG probes in array content selection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13148-022-01320-9. BioMed Central 2022-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9367152/ /pubmed/35948928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13148-022-01320-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Hillary, Robert F. McCartney, Daniel L. McRae, Allan F. Campbell, Archie Walker, Rosie M. Hayward, Caroline Horvath, Steve Porteous, David J. Evans, Kathryn L. Marioni, Riccardo E. Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title | Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title_full | Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title_fullStr | Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title_full_unstemmed | Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title_short | Identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
title_sort | identification of influential probe types in epigenetic predictions of human traits: implications for microarray design |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9367152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35948928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13148-022-01320-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hillaryrobertf identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT mccartneydaniell identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT mcraeallanf identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT campbellarchie identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT walkerrosiem identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT haywardcaroline identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT horvathsteve identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT porteousdavidj identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT evanskathrynl identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign AT marioniriccardoe identificationofinfluentialprobetypesinepigeneticpredictionsofhumantraitsimplicationsformicroarraydesign |