4.5 Article

Variance component tests of multivariate mediation effects under composite null hypotheses

Journal

BIOMETRICS
Volume 75, Issue 4, Pages 1191-1204

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/biom.13073

Keywords

composite null hypothesis; intersection-union test; joint significance test; mediation analyses; normal product distribution

Funding

  1. Academia Sinica [AS-CDA-108-M03]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [105-2118-M-001-014-MY3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mediation effects of multiple mediators are determined by two associations: one between an exposure and mediators (S-M) and the other between the mediators and an outcome conditional on the exposure (M-Y). The test for mediation effects is conducted under a composite null hypothesis, that is, either one of the S-M and M-Y associations is zero or both are zeros. Without accounting for the composite null, the type 1 error rate within a study containing a large number of multimediator tests may be much less than the expected. We propose a novel test to address the issue. For each mediation test j, j = 1, ..., J, we examine the S-M and M-Y associations using two separate variance component tests. Assuming a zero-mean working distribution with a common variance for the element-wise S-M (and M-Y) associations, score tests for the variance components are constructed. We transform the test statistics into two normally distributed statistics under the null. Using a recently developed result, we conduct J hypothesis tests accounting for the composite null hypothesis by adjusting for the variances of the normally distributed statistics for the S-M and M-Y associations. Advantages of the proposed test over other methods are illustrated in simulation studies and a data application where we analyze lung cancer data from The Cancer Genome Atlas to investigate the smoking effect on gene expression through DNA methylation in 15 114 genes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available