Search

Genetic risk for complex traits is strongly enriched in non-coding genomic regions involved in gene regulation, especially enhancers. However, we lack adequate tools to connect the characteristics of these disruptions to genetic risk. Here, we propose RWAS (Regulome Wide Association Study), a new application of the MAGMA software package to identify the characteristics of enhancers that contribute to genetic risk for disease. RWAS involves three steps: (i) assign genotyped SNPs to cell type- or tissue-specific regulatory features (e.g., enhancers); (ii) test associations of each regulatory feature with a trait of interest for which genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics are available; (iii) perform enhancer-set enrichment analyses to identify quantitative or categorical features of regulatory elements that are associated with the trait. These steps are implemented as a novel application of MAGMA, a tool originally developed for gene-based GWAS analyses. Applying RWAS to interrogate genetic risk for schizophrenia, we discovered a class of risk-associated AT-rich enhancers that are active in the developing brain and harbor binding sites for multiple transcription factors with neurodevelopmental functions. RWAS utilizes open-source software, and we provide a comprehensive collection of annotations for tissue-specific enhancer locations and features, including their evolutionary conservation, AT content, and co-localization with binding sites for hundreds of TFs. RWAS will enable researchers to characterize properties of regulatory elements associated with any trait of interest for which GWAS summary statistics are available.

Replicability, the ability to replicate scientific findings, is a prerequisite for scientific discovery and clinical utility. Troublingly, we are in the midst of a replicability crisis. A key to replicability is that multiple measurements of the same item (e.g., experimental sample or clinical participant) under fixed experimental constraints are relatively similar to one another. Thus, statistics that quantify the relative contributions of accidental deviations-such as measurement error-as compared to systematic deviations-such as individual differences-are critical. We demonstrate that existing replicability statistics, such as intra-class correlation coefficient and fingerprinting, fail to adequately differentiate between accidental and systematic deviations in very simple settings. We therefore propose a novel statistic, discriminability, which quantifies the degree to which an individual's samples are relatively similar to one another, without restricting the data to be univariate, Gaussian, or even Euclidean. Using this statistic, we introduce the possibility of optimizing experimental design via increasing discriminability and prove that optimizing discriminability improves performance bounds in subsequent inference tasks. In extensive simulated and real datasets (focusing on brain imaging and demonstrating on genomics), only optimizing data discriminability improves performance on all subsequent inference tasks for each dataset. We therefore suggest that designing experiments and analyses to optimize discriminability may be a crucial step in solving the replicability crisis, and more generally, mitigating accidental measurement error.