bio-causal-genomics-transcriptome-wide-association
Performs gene-level association from GWAS summary statistics via genetically predicted tissue expression using FUSION, PrediXcan, S-PrediXcan, S-MultiXcan, UTMOST, MOSTWAS, kTWAS, EpiXcan, TIGAR-V2, and probabilistic fine-mapping with FOCUS and MA-FOCUS. Use when running TWAS from GWAS sumstats, prioritising candidate causal genes from a GWAS lead locus, picking single-tissue vs cross-tissue models, identifying LD-induced TWAS false positives, choosing ancestry-matched prediction weights, fine-mapping co-regulated TWAS hits, or triangulating TWAS with cis-eQTL Mendelian randomization and colocalization to nominate a causal gene.
What this skill does
## Version Compatibility Reference examples tested with: FUSION (head of `gusevlab/fusion_twas`, scripts dated 2023+), MetaXcan / S-PrediXcan / S-MultiXcan 0.7.5+ (`hakyimlab/MetaXcan`), PrediXcan model files from PredictDB (GTEx v8 elastic-net + MASHR), UTMOST (head of `Joker-Jerome/UTMOST`), pyfocus 0.8+ (`bogdanlab/focus`), MA-FOCUS (head of `mancusolab/ma-focus`), TIGAR-V2 (head of `yanglab-emory/TIGAR`), PLINK 1.9 + PLINK 2.0, R 4.3+, Python 3.9-3.11. Before using code patterns, verify installed versions match. If versions differ: - R: `Rscript --version`; for FUSION scripts inspect `--help` flags directly in the source - Python: `pip show metaxcan pyfocus` then `SPrediXcan.py --help`, `SMulTiXcan.py --help`, `focus finemap --help` - CLI: `plink2 --version`; FUSION ships as R scripts not a binary If a script throws an error about an argument that has moved (e.g. `--gwas_file` vs `--gwas-file`) or a model database schema change, introspect the installed script with `--help` and adapt rather than retrying. PredictDB model file paths change with GTEx version; pin the version explicitly in scripts. # Transcriptome-Wide Association **"Find genes whose predicted tissue expression is associated with my GWAS trait"** -> Train SNP -> expression prediction models on a reference eQTL panel, apply the per-gene SNP weights to GWAS summary statistics or genotypes, and produce a gene-level Z-score equivalent to a weighted sum of SNP Z-scores. The output is a gene-by-tissue association, but TWAS is NOT direct evidence of causal mediation: an LD-tagged eQTL signal produces the same statistical association as a truly causal one, and the dominant failure modes are LD-induced false positives at gene-dense loci, tissue mis-specification, and ancestry mismatch between GWAS and prediction weights. - CLI (sumstat TWAS, R): `FUSION.assoc_test.R --sumstats g.sumstats --weights weights.pos --weights_dir wgt/ --ref_ld_chr 1KG/EUR. --chr 22 --out chr22.dat` - CLI (S-PrediXcan, Python): `SPrediXcan.py --model_db_path gtex_v8.db --covariance gtex_v8.cov --gwas_file g.txt --output_file out.csv` - CLI (S-MultiXcan joint): `SMulTiXcan.py --models_folder mashr_models/ --gwas_folder gwas/ --metaxcan_folder spredixcan_per_tissue/ --output joint.csv` - CLI (UTMOST cross-tissue): joint test across tissues via UTMOST's per-tissue GBJ / GBJ2 step - CLI (FOCUS fine-mapping): `focus finemap chr22.dat 1KG_EUR focus.db --p-threshold 5e-8 --out chr22.focus` - CLI (MA-FOCUS multi-ancestry): `focus finemap` with colon-separated per-ancestry sumstats / LD / weights and ancestry codes in `--locations` TWAS, cis-eQTL MR, and coloc operate on overlapping evidence: TWAS asks "is the gene's predicted expression associated with the trait?"; cis-eQTL MR asks "does the eQTL effect on expression mediate the trait effect under IV assumptions?"; coloc asks "do the GWAS and eQTL share a causal variant?". Strong causal claims require triangulation, not single-method significance. ## Algorithmic Taxonomy | Tool | Model | Input | Output | Strength | Fails when | |------|-------|-------|--------|----------|------------| | FUSION (Gusev 2016 Nat Genet 48:245) | Weighted sum of SNP Z-scores; per-gene multi-model (BLUP, lasso, elnet, top1, bslmm) selected by cross-validation R^2 | GWAS sumstats + pre-computed weights (.pos + per-gene RData) | TWAS Z, p; conditional joint analysis | Mature, ENCODE-style, pre-trained weights for many tissues (GTEx, CMC, METSIM, YFS, NTR) | LD-induced false positives at gene-dense loci; needs ancestry-matched LD reference; weights are heritability-thresholded so low-h2 genes drop | | PrediXcan (Gamazon 2015 Nat Genet 47:1091) | Elastic-net SNP -> expression prediction; individual-level genotypes | PLINK genotypes + GWAS phenotype + GTEx prediction DB | Per-gene association test with full regression machinery | Most flexible (allows covariates, interactions, binary outcomes); same TWAS interpretation | Requires individual-level data; biobank-scale compute | | S-PrediXcan (Barbeira 2018 Nat Commun 9:1825) | Summary-statistic equivalent of PrediXcan; Z-score weighted sum analogous to FUSION | GWAS sumstats + PredictDB model + covariance | Per-gene Z, p | Public PredictDB models (GTEx v8 elastic-net + MASHR-EUR); minimal compute | Pre-trained weights ancestry-specific (EUR primarily); covariance file must match model DB | | S-MultiXcan (Barbeira 2019 PLoS Genet 15:e1007889) | Joint multi-tissue test combining per-tissue S-PrediXcan via PCA-regularised regression | Folder of per-tissue S-PrediXcan outputs + model folder | Single joint p per gene + per-tissue significance | Boosts power when causal tissue is unknown; standard for transcriptome-wide screens | Joint test cannot pinpoint causal tissue; correlated tissues produce ill-conditioned regression | | UTMOST (Hu 2019 Nat Genet 51:568) | Cross-tissue elastic-net (group lasso) for joint tissue prediction + GBJ test | Per-tissue eQTL data + GWAS sumstats | Cross-tissue joint statistic | Often better-powered than S-MultiXcan at cross-tissue genes | Computationally heavier than MetaXcan; tissue weights are less interpretable | | MOSTWAS (Bhattacharya 2021 PLoS Genet 17:e1009398) | Mediator-aware TWAS adding distal trans-mediating SNPs to cis-only models | GWAS sumstats + MOSTWAS weights | Per-gene Z, p (TWAS + distal mediator extension) | Recovers signal at genes with non-cis genetic regulation | Trans-mediation models need large reference panel; weights less broadly available | | kTWAS (Cao 2021 Brief Bioinform 22:bbaa270) | Kernel-based TWAS using SKAT-style aggregation | GWAS sumstats or genotypes + per-gene SNP set | Per-gene p | Robust to non-linear and rare-variant contributions | Loses the eQTL-weighting interpretability; less standardised | | EpiXcan (Zhang 2019 Nat Commun 10:3300) | Adds epigenome-derived per-SNP prior to weight training | eQTL + epigenome + GWAS sumstats | Per-gene Z, p (epigenome-informed) | Higher prediction R^2 in epigenome-rich tissues | Requires matched epigenome data for the prediction tissue | | TIGAR-V2 (Tang 2021 NAR 49:e64) | Dirichlet process regression (non-parametric Bayes) for SNP -> expression | Reference eQTL + GWAS sumstats | Per-gene Z, p | Captures non-elastic-net effect structures; more flexible weight learning | Slower training; benefits depend on locus genetics | | FOCUS (Mancuso 2019 Nat Genet 51:675) | Probabilistic gene-level fine-mapping over TWAS Z-scores using gene-by-gene predicted-expression correlation as analog of LD | FUSION/S-PrediXcan TWAS Z + ancestry-matched LD reference | Per-gene PIP + credible gene set | Resolves co-regulated gene clusters into a probabilistic causal gene; standard add-on after TWAS | Requires the same prediction-weight panel that produced TWAS Z; PIPs depend on prior | | MA-FOCUS (Lu 2022 AJHG 109:1388-1404) | Multi-ancestry FOCUS; joint gene fine-mapping across ancestries with shared causal-gene assumption | Per-ancestry TWAS sumstats + per-ancestry weights + per-ancestry LD | Cross-ancestry PIP | Smaller credible gene sets when AFR/EAS contribute non-EUR LD information | Trans-ethnic gene-effect heterogeneity violated; weights must be ancestry-matched | | JEPEG / JEPEG-Mix (Lee 2015 / 2016) | Gene-based test combining eQTL and functional weights | GWAS sumstats + JEPEG annotation database | Per-gene p | Lightweight gene-burden alternative to TWAS | Less granular than full PrediXcan/FUSION machinery; minimally updated | Methodology evolves; the FUSION-vs-PrediXcan landscape has been stable but probabilistic fine-mapping (FOCUS, MA-FOCUS) and integrative methods (MOSTWAS, EpiXcan, OmicsXcan) continue to advance. Verify against the current PredictDB release notes (predictdb.org) and the latest FUSION weight panels (gusevlab.org/projects/fusion) before locking on a tissue or model. S-PrediXcan and FUSION are mathematically near-identical: both compute a weighted sum of GWAS SNP Z-scores using per-gene SNP-expression weights and an LD-aware va
Related in Sales & CRM
process-mapper
IncludedUse when a BizOps lead, COO, or process-improvement owner needs to document an end-to-end business process (procurement, employee onboarding, incident handoff, customer-onboarding, claims adjudication) in BPMN-style notation, measure cycle times by stage, surface where work spends most of its time waiting vs. being worked, and quantify the gap between processing time and total elapsed time. Pairs Lean / Six Sigma / Theory-of-Constraints canon with deterministic stdlib-only Python tools to produce a process map, a ranked bottleneck list (with severity + root-cause hypothesis), and a cycle-time analysis (P50, P90, value-add ratio, Little's-Law throughput). Distinct from sales-pipeline, system-reliability (SLO), and strategic-OKR work — this is tactical process documentation for internal operations.
payment-integration
IncludedIntegrate payments with SePay (VietQR), Polar, Stripe, Paddle (MoR subscriptions), Creem.io (licensing). Checkout, webhooks, subscriptions, QR codes, multi-provider orders.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.