Functional and pathway assessment

GK Gursharan Kalsi
JE Jack Euesden
JC Jonathan R. I. Coleman
FD Francesca Ducci
FA Fazil Aliev
SN Stephen J. Newhouse
XL Xiehe Liu
XM Xiaohong Ma
YW Yingcheng Wang
DC David A. Collier
PA Philip Asherson
TL Tao Li
GB Gerome Breen
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

Pathways were extracted from MSigDB v5.2 canonical pathways (CP) and Gene Ontology (GO) datasets; MSigDB [28] is distinguished for having the largest collection of gene sets, derived from diverse gene set sources. Only pathways containing 10–1000 genes were included, yielding a total of 7111 pathways (1309 CP, 5802 GO) for the analysis. We compiled gene sets in our association data using a 35kb upstream and 10kb downstream window to include gene regulatory regions and MAF ≥ 0.05. The genes were encoded by ENSEMBL identifiers (release 75, genome assembly h19). Pathways were assigned competitive p-values using MAGMA v1.05 [29] which assesses whether a pathway is more associated with a trait than other pathways, and takes into account linkage disequilibrium (LD). The reference data used for LD was the Southern Han Chinese subset (CHS) of 1000 genomes phase III data [30]. The gene and pathway p-values were adjusted using Benjamini-Hochberg FDR procedure [31] to obtain q-values. In silico tissue specific expression of the top genes from the association and VEGAS2 analyses, was examined using the freely available online database, Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) Portal (http://www.gtexportal.org/).

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A