ArticleBMC genomics2025
Multi-ancestry genome-wide association analyses: a comparison of meta- and mega-analyses in the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic association meta-analysis is susceptible to confounding by between-study cryptic relatedness.HGG advances · 2026Article
- Multi-omics mediation pipeline reveals differential pathways of maternal SNPs affecting newborn adiposity outcomes.BMC genomic data · 2025Article
- In Utero Exposure to Maternal Hyperglycemia and Offspring Type 2 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score Are Independently Associated With Risk of Impaired Glucose Tolerance in Youth.Diabetes care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing need for effective incorporation of high-dimensional genetics data from individuals with varied ancestry in genome-wide association (GWAS) analyses. Classically, multi-ancestry GWAS analyses are performed using statistical meta-analysis to combine results conducted within homogeneous ancestry groups. The emergence of cosmopolitan reference panels makes collective preprocessing of GWAS data possible, but impact on downstream GWAS results in a mega-analysis framework merits investigation. We utilized GWAS data from the multi-national Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Study to investigate differences in GWAS findings using a homogeneous ancestry meta-analysis versus a heterogeneous ancestry mega-analysis pipeline. Maternal fasting and 1-hr glucose and metabolomics measured during a 2-hr 75-gram oral glucose tolerance test during early third trimester pregnancy were evaluated as phenotypes.
resultsFor the homogeneous ancestry meta-analysis pipeline, variant data were prepared by identifying sets of individuals with similar ancestry and imputing to ancestry-specific reference panels. GWAS was conducted within each ancestry group and results were combined using random-effects meta-analysis. For the heterogeneous ancestry mega-analysis pipeline, data for all individuals were collectively imputed to the Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) cosmopolitan reference panel, and GWAS was conducted using a unified mega-analysis. The meta-analysis pipeline identified genome-wide significant associations for 15 variants in a region close to GCK on chromosome 7 with maternal fasting glucose and no significant findings for 1-hr glucose. Associations in this same region were identified using the mega-analysis pipeline, along with a well-documented association at MTNR1B on chromosome 11 with both fasting and 1-hr maternal glucose. For metabolomics analyses, the number of significant findings in the heterogeneous ancestry mega-analysis far exceeded those from the homogeneous ancestry meta-analysis and confirmed many previously documented associations, but genomic inflation factors were much more variable.
conclusionsFor multi-ancestry GWAS, heterogeneous ancestry mega-analysis generates a rich set of variants for analysis using a cosmopolitan reference panel and results in vastly more significant, biologically credible and previously documented associations than a homogeneous ancestry meta-analysis approach. Genomic inflation factors do indicate that findings from the mega-analysis pipeline may merit cautious interpretation and further follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.