
The sffdr package implements the surrogate functional false discovery
rate (sfFDR) procedure. This methodology integrates GWAS summary
statistics from related traits (i.e., pleiotropy) to increase
statistical power within the functional FDR framework. The inputs into
sffdr are a set of p-values from a GWAS of interest and a set of
p-values from one or many informative GWAS.
The significance quantities estimated by sffdr can be used for a
variety of analyses:
The methods implemented in this package are described in:
Bass AJ, Wallace C. Exploiting pleiotropy to enhance variant discovery with functional false discovery rates. Nature Computational Science; 2025.
Note that this work is an extension of the functional FDR methodology
and the software builds on some of the functions in the fFDR package
found at https://github.com/StoreyLab/fFDR.
To report any bugs or issues related to usage please report it on GitHub at https://github.com/ajbass/sffdr.
You can install the development version of sffdr from GitHub:
# install development version of package
install.packages("devtools")
# devtools::install_github("ajbass/sffdr")
install.packages("sffdr", repos = c('https://ajbass.r-universe.dev', 'https://cloud.r-project.org'))
To demonstrate the package, we will use a sample dataset containing 10,000 SNPs for body mass index (BMI) as the primary trait of interest, with body fat percentage (BFP), cholesterol, and triglycerides as informative traits.
library(sffdr)
data(bmi)
# Define primary p-values and informative p-values
p <- sumstats$bmi
z <- as.matrix(sumstats[,-1])
head(sumstats)
The first step is to model the relationship between the functional
proportion of null tests and the informative traits. We use pi0_model
to create a model and fpi0est to estimate $\pi_{0}(z)$.
# Create model: adaptively chooses knots at small quantiles where signal is expected
mpi0 <- pi0_model(z)
# Estimation of functional pi0
fpi0 <- fpi0est(p, mpi0)
Note on Knots: Ideally, knots should cover the distribution of
non-null p-values in your informative studies. Our algorithm uses an FDR
threshold to choose the location of the knots and the number of knots.
Depending on the study, you may want to changes these values (see
?pi0_model). Note that this toy example contains only 10,000 p-values, so the knot locations are not optimal since the function was designed for GWAS-scale data.
With the functional $\pi_{0}$ estimated, we can now calculate the FDR quantities and functional p-values.
# Apply sfFDR
sffdr_out <- sffdr(p, fpi0 = fpi0$fpi0)
# Extract results
results <- data.frame(
p_value = p,
fp_value = sffdr_out$fpvalues,
fq_value = sffdr_out$fqvalues,
flfdr = sffdr_out$flfdr
)
# Plot significance results (focusing on high-significance SNPs)
plot(sffdr_out)
In standard GWAS, SNPs are often correlated due to LD. To account for
this, you should provide a vector indicating which SNPs are
LD-independent (e.g., via pruning). sffdr uses these independent SNPs
to fit the model, then computes the significance quantities for the
entire dataset.
# logical vector: TRUE if SNP is LD-independent
# (In this example, all SNPs are already independent)
indep_snps <- rep(TRUE, length(p))
# Fit model using LD-independent subset
mpi0 <- pi0_model(z = z, indep_snps = indep_snps)
fpi0 <- fpi0est(p, mpi0, indep_snps = indep_snps)
# Estimate quantities for all SNPs
sffdr_out <- sffdr(p, fpi0 = fpi0$fpi0)
Note on choosing independent SNPs: There are two strategies: (1)
prune using plink (e.g., --indep-pairwise 200kb 1 0.3) and use the
pruned set of SNPs as the independent set, or (2) use informed sampling
of the informative traits (e.g., clumping or based on LD blocks). The
latter is likely better when the primary study has low power.
If LD scores ($l_{j}$) are available (e.g., from LDSC regression), there are two ways to use them.
# LD score (log scale) added to the pi0 model built by pi0_model()
zt <- cbind(mpi0$zt, ld = log(ld_score))
fmod <- update(mpi0$fmod, ~ . + ns(ld, df = 3))
fpi0 <- fpi0est(p, z = zt, pi0_model = fmod, indep_snps = indep_snps)
sffdr_out <- sffdr(p, fpi0 = fpi0$fpi0)
w <- 1 / ld_score
mpi0 <- pi0_model(z, weights = w)
fpi0 <- fpi0est(p, mpi0, weights = w)
sffdr_out <- sffdr(p, fpi0 = fpi0$fpi0)
sffdr() itself does not use weights: its density is estimated over all tested SNPs, which is the set the functional p-values count errors in, and reweighting that density biases the local FDR (SNPs in LD are each tested, so each counts).
Note on incorporating LD scores: As LD scores are available for common reference panels (e.g., 1000 Genomes), they can be easily downloaded to use in sfFDR. If you have LD scores calculated from your data then that's even better. However, it is problematic to use LD scores when the reference panel is not matched to your study population. In that case, the pruning (or informative sampling) strategy discussed above is the best option.
If the primary and informative studies share participants (e.g., traits measured in the same biobank), pass the signed informative z-scores through decorrelate_informative() and use its p-values ($p2) as the informative p-values in pi0_model(); the primary p-values are used unchanged (see ?decorrelate_informative).
The selection of knots in the B-spline basis is an important tuning parameter in sffdr. If your surrogate GWAS has extremely high power (very small p-values), we recommend placing more knots at the lower end of the p-value distribution to capture the local density of signals.
# Create model (can include other variables (e.g., MAF) or specify more complicated models)
fmod <- "~ns(bfp, knots = c(0.01, 0.025, 0.05, 0.1))"
fpi0_mod <- fpi0est(p = p,
z = mpi0$zt,
pi0_model = fmod)
Note on incorporating additional variables: Other informative covariates can be included in the model (e.g., MAF, LD score, etc.). While the LD score annotations can be used (e.g., the baselineLD model), we have found that using the expected $\chi^{2}$ given the annotations performs better in practice and simplifies the model fitting.