Quantifying uncertainty of molecular mismatch introduced by mislabeled ancestry using haplotype-based HLA genotype imputation

Modern histocompatibility algorithms depend on the comparison and analysis of high-resolution HLA protein sequences and structures, especially when considering epitope-based algorithms, which aim to model the interactions involved in antibody or T cell binding. HLA genotype imputation can be performed in the cases where only low/intermediate-resolution HLA genotype is available or if specific loci are missing, and by providing an individuals’ race/ethnicity/ancestry information, imputation results can be more accurate. This study assesses the effect of imputing high-resolution genotypes on molecular mismatch scores under a variety of ancestry assumptions. We compared molecular matching scores from “ground-truth” high-resolution genotypes against scores from genotypes which are imputed from low-resolution genotypes. Analysis was focused on a simulated patient-donor dataset and confirmed using two real-world datasets, and deviations were aggregated based on various ancestry assumptions. We observed that using multiple imputation generally results in lower error in molecular matching scores compared to single imputation, and that using the correct ancestry assumptions can reduce error introduced during imputation. We conclude that for epitope analysis, imputation is a valuable and low-risk strategy, as long as care is taken regarding epitope analysis context, ancestry assumptions, and (multiple) imputation strategy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
UNC Libraries
Published
2024-10-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17615/3xgj-4k11
Primary Topic
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantifying uncertainty of molecular mismatch introduced by mislabeled ancestry using haplotype-based HLA genotype imputation

Eric Spierings, Eric T. Weimer, Stefan Schaub, Benedict M. Matern et al.
UNC Libraries
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
article

Quantifying uncertainty of molecular mismatch introduced by mislabeled ancestry using haplotype-based HLA genotype imputation

Eric Spierings, Eric T. Weimer, Stefan Schaub, Benedict M. Matern, Matthias Niemann, Abeer Madbouly, S. Bandstra
article en

Abstract

Modern histocompatibility algorithms depend on the comparison and analysis of high-resolution HLA protein sequences and structures, especially when considering epitope-based algorithms, which aim to model the interactions involved in antibody or T cell binding. HLA genotype imputation can be performed in the cases where only low/intermediate-resolution HLA genotype is available or if specific loci are missing, and by providing an individuals’ race/ethnicity/ancestry information, imputation results can be more accurate. This study assesses the effect of imputing high-resolution genotypes on molecular mismatch scores under a variety of ancestry assumptions. We compared molecular matching scores from “ground-truth” high-resolution genotypes against scores from genotypes which are imputed from low-resolution genotypes. Analysis was focused on a simulated patient-donor dataset and confirmed using two real-world datasets, and deviations were aggregated based on various ancestry assumptions. We observed that using multiple imputation generally results in lower error in molecular matching scores compared to single imputation, and that using the correct ancestry assumptions can reduce error introduced during imputation. We conclude that for epitope analysis, imputation is a valuable and low-risk strategy, as long as care is taken regarding epitope analysis context, ancestry assumptions, and (multiple) imputation strategy.

UNC Libraries
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.