Background Expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) studies show how genetic variants affect downstream gene expression. Single-cell data allows reconstruction of personalized co-expression networks and therefore the identification of SNPs altering co-expression patterns (co-expression QTLs, co-eQTLs) and the affected upstream regulatory processes using a limited number of individuals. Results We conduct a co-eQTL meta-analysis across four scRNA-seq peripheral blood mononuclear cell datasets using a novel filtering strategy followed by a permutation-based multiple testing approach. Before the analysis, we evaluate the co-expression patterns required for co-eQTL identification using different external resources. We identify a robust set of cell-type-specific co-eQTLs for 72 independent SNPs affecting 946 gene pairs. These co-eQTLs are replicated in a large bulk cohort and provide novel insights into how disease-associated variants alter regulatory networks. One co-eQTL SNP, rs1131017, that is associated with several autoimmune diseases, affects the co-expression of RPS26 with other ribosomal genes. Interestingly, specifically in T cells, the SNP additionally affects co-expression of RPS26 and a group of genes associated with T cell activation and autoimmune disease. Among these genes, we identify enrichment for targets of five T-cell-activation-related transcription factors whose binding sites harbor rs1131017. This reveals a previously overlooked process and pinpoints potential regulators that could explain the association of rs1131017 with autoimmune diseases. Conclusion Our co-eQTL results highlight the importance of studying context-specific gene regulation to understand the biological implications of genetic variation. With the expected growth of sc-eQTL datasets, our strategy and technical guidelines will facilitate future co-eQTL identification, further elucidating unknown disease mechanisms.

The growing public interest in genetic risk scores for various health conditions can be harnessed to inspire preventive health action. However, current commercially available genetic risk scores can be deceiving as they do not consider other, easily attainable risk factors, such as sex, BMI, age, smoking habits, parental disease status and physical activity. Recent scientific literature shows that adding these factors can improve PGS based predictions significantly. However, implementation of existing PGS based models that also consider these factors requires reference data based on a specific genotyping chip, which is not always available. In this paper, we offer a method naïve to the genotyping chip used. We train these models using the UK Biobank data and test these externally in the Lifelines cohort. We show improved performance at identifying the 10% most at-risk individuals for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and coronary artery disease (CAD) by including common risk factors. Incidence in the highest risk group increases from 3.0- and 4.0-fold to 5.8 for T2D, when comparing the genetics-based model, common risk factor-based model and combined model, respectively. Similarly, we observe an increase from 2.4- and 3.0-fold to 4.7-fold risk for CAD. As such, we conclude that it is paramount that these additional variables are considered when reporting risk, unlike current practice with current available genetic tests.

The growing public interest in genetic risk scores for various health conditions may inspire preventive health action. However, these risk scores can be deceiving as they do not consider other, easily attainable risk factors, such as sex, BMI, age, smoking habits, parental disease status and physical activity. We show improved performance in identifying the 10% most at-risk individuals for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and coronary artery disease (CAD) by including these common risk factors. Incidence in the highest risk group increases from 3.2- and 4.2-fold to 5.8 for T2D, when comparing the genetics-based model, common risk factor-based model and combined model, respectively. Similarly, we see an increase from 2.9- and 2.4-fold to 5.0-fold risk for CAD. Importantly, we show that genetic and common risk factors capture different risks. As such, it is paramount that all these variables are considered when reporting risk, unlike current practice with available genetic tests.