1. School of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China 2. Department of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland OH 44106, USA 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland OH 44106, USA
Interaction detection in large-scale genetic association studies has attracted intensive research interest, since many diseases have complex traits. Various approaches have been developed for finding significant genetic interactions. In this article, we propose a novel framework SRMiner to detect interacting susceptible and protective genotype patterns. SRMiner can discover not only probable combination of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) causing diseases but also the corresponding SNPs suppressing their pathogenic functions, which provides a better prospective to uncover the underlying relevance between genetic variants and complex diseases. We have performed extensive experiments on several real Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC) datasets. We use the pathway-based and the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network-based evaluation methods to verify the discovered patterns. The results show that SRMiner successfully identifies many disease-related genes verified by the existing work. Furthermore, SRMiner can also infer some uncomfirmed but highly possible disease-related genes.
LiJ, WangL M, GuoM Z, Zhang R J, DaiQ G , LiuX Y, WangC Y, TengZ, Xuan P, ZhangM M . Mining disease genes using integrated protein-protein interaction and gene-gene co-regulation information. FEBS Open Bio, 2015, 5(1): 251–256 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fob.2015.03.011
2
CordellH J. Detecting gene-gene interactions that underlie human diseases. Natural Reviews Genetics, 2009, 10(6): 392–404 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2579
3
ZengX X, ZhangX, ZouQ. Integrative approaches for predicting microRNA function and prioritizing disease-related microRNA using biological interaction networks. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 2015
4
ZouQ, LiJ J, SongL, Zeng X X, WangG H . Similarity computation strategies in the microRNA-disease network: a survey. Briefings in Functional Genomics, 2016, 15(1): 55–64
5
ZhangL, ChenS C, LiuX J. Detecting differential expression from RNA-seq data with expression measurement uncertainty. Frontiers of Computer Science, 2015, 9(4): 652–663 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-015-4308-6
6
ShangJ L, ZhangJ Y, SunY, Liu D, YeD J , YinY L. Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis. BMC Bioinformatics, 2011, 12(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-475
7
WangY, LiuG M, FengM L, Wong L. An empirical comparison of several recent epistatic interaction detection methods. Bioinformatics, 2011, 27(21): 2936–2943 https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr512
8
LiP, GuoM Z, WangC Y, Liu X Y, ZouQ . An overview of SNP interactions in genome-wide association studies. Briefings in Functional Genomics, 2014, 14(3): 129–141
9
LiJ, HuangD L, GuoM Z, Liu X Y, WangC Y , TengZ X, ZhangR J, JiangY S, Lv H C, WangL M . A gene-based information gain method for detecting gene-gene interactions in case-control studies. European Journal of Human Genetics, 2015 https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2015.16
10
PanJ B, HuS C, WangH, Zou Q, JiZ L . PaGeFinder: quantitative identification of spatiotemporal pattern genes. Bioinformatics, 2012, 28(11): 1544–1545 https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts169
11
InfanteJ, SanzC, Fernández-LunaJ L , LlorcaJ, Berciano J, CombarrosO . Gene-gene interaction between interleukin-1A and interleukin-8 increases Alzheimer’s disease risk. Journal of Neurology, 2004, 251(4): 482–483 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-004-0375-6
12
CombarrosO, van Duijn C M, HammondN , BelbinO, Arias-Vásquez A, Cortina-BorjaM , LehmannM G, Aulchenko Y S, SchuurM , KölschH. Replication by the Epistasis Project of the interaction between the genes for IL-6 and IL-10 in the risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neuroinflammation, 2009, 6(1): 22 https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-2094-6-22
13
BaryshnikovaA, Costanzo M, MyersC L , AndrewsB, BooneC. Genetic interaction networks: toward an understanding of heritability. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 2013, 14(1) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-082509-141730
14
GoldsteinD B. Common genetic variation and human traits. New England Journal of Medicine, 2009, 360(17): 1696 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0806284
15
McCarthyM I, Abecasis G R, CardonL R , GoldsteinD B, LittleJ, IoannidisJ P A , HirschhornJ N. Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2008, 9(5): 356–369 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2344
16
MooreJ H, Gilbert J C, TsaiC T , ChiangF T, HoldenT, BarneyN, White B C. A flexible computational framework for detecting, characterizing, and interpreting statistical patterns of epistasis in genetic studies of human disease susceptibility. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2006, 241(2): 252–261 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.11.036
17
WanX, YangC, YangQ, Xue H, FanX D , TangN L S, YuW C. BOOST: a fast approach to detecting gene-gene interactions in genome-wide case-control studies. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 2010, 87(3): 325–340 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.07.021
18
WanX, YangCan, YangQ, Xue H, TangN L S , YuW C. Predictive rule inference for epistatic interaction detection in genome-wide association studies. Bioinformatics, 2010, 26(1): 30–37 https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp622
19
ZhangY, LiuJ S. Bayesian inference of epistatic interactions in casecontrol studies. Nature Genetics, 2007, 39(9): 1167–1173 https://doi.org/10.1038/ng2110
20
ZhangX, HuangS P, ZouF, Wang W. TEAM: efficient two-locus epistasis tests in human genome-wide association study. Bioinformatics, 2010, 26(12): i217–i227 https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq186
21
JanssensA C J W, van Duijn C M. Genome-based prediction of common diseases: advances and prospects. Human Molecular Genetics, 2008, 17(R2): R166–R173 https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddn250
22
AbdiH, Williams L J. Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2010, 2(4): 433–459 https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.101
23
ZhaoY H, WangG R, LiY, WangZ H. Finding novel diagnostic gene patterns based on interesting non-redundant contrast sequence rules. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. 2011, 972–981 https://doi.org/10.1109/icdm.2011.68
24
MontgomeryS. Linkage disequilibrium—understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2008, 9(6): 477–485 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2361
25
PurcellS, NealeB, Todd-BrownK , ThomasL, Ferreira M A R, BenderD , MallerJ, SklarP, de BakkerP I W , DalyM J, ShamP C. PLINK: A tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. American Journal of Human Genetics, 2007, 81(3): 559–575 https://doi.org/10.1086/519795
26
GoldbergA V. Finding a maximum density subgraph. University of California Berkeley, CA, 1984
27
CharikarM. Greedy approximation algorithms for finding dense components in a graph. Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Optimization, 2000, 139–152 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44436-x_10
28
FanW, ZhangK, ChengH, Gao J, YanX F , HanJ W, YuP, VerscheureO . Direct mining of discriminative and essential frequent patterns via model-based search tree. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 2008, 230–238 https://doi.org/10.1145/1401890.1401922
29
The Well come Trust Case Control Consortium. Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature, 2007, 447(7145): 661–678 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05911
30
HanJ W, PeiJ, YinY W. Mining frequent patterns without candidate generation. ACM SIGMOD Record, 2000, 29(2): 1–12 https://doi.org/10.1145/335191.335372
31
PanF, CongG, TungA K H, Yang J, ZakiM J . Carpenter: finding closed patterns in long biological datasets. In: Proceedings of ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 2003, 637–642
32
SacconeS F, QuanJ X, JonesP L. BioQ: tracing experimental origins in public genomic databases using a novel data provenance model. Bioinformatics, 2012, 28(8): 1189–1191 https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts117
33
Chatr-aryamontriA, Breitkreutz B J, HeinickeS , BoucherL, WinterA, StarkC, Nixon J, RamageL , KolasN, O’Donmell L. The BioGRID interaction database: 2013 update. Nucleic Acids Research, 2013, 41(D1): D816–D823 https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1158
34
WangK, LiM Y, BucanM. Pathway-based approaches for analysis of genomewide association studies. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 2007, 81(6): 1278–1283 https://doi.org/10.1086/522374
35
ChenL S, HutterC M, PotterJ D, Liu Y, PrenticeR L , PetersU, HsuL. Insights into colon cancer etiology via a regularized approach to gene set analysis of gwas data. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 2010, 86(6): 860–871 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.04.014
36
LiM X, KwanJ S H, ShamP C. HYST: A hybrid set-based test for genome-wide association studies, with application to protein-protein interaction-based association analysis. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 2012, 91(3): 478–488 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2012.08.004
37
PawsonT, NashP. Protein–protein interactions define specificity in signal transduction. Genes & Development, 2000, 14(9): 1027–1047
38
SharanR, Ulitsky I, ShamirR . Network-based prediction of protein function. Molecular Systems Biology, 2007, 3(1): 88 https://doi.org/10.1038/msb4100129
