  High-dimensional phenotypes hold promise for richer findings in association
studies, but testing of several phenotype traits aggravates the grand challenge
of association studies, that of multiple testing. Several methods have recently
been proposed for testing jointly all traits in a high-dimensional vector of
phenotypes, with prospect of increased power to detect small effects that would
be missed if tested individually. However, the methods have rarely been
compared to the extent of enabling assessment of their relative merits and
setting up guidelines on which method to use, and how to use it. We compare the
methods on simulated data and with a real metabolomics data set comprising 137
highly correlated variables and approximately 550,000 SNPs.
  Applying the methods to genome-wide data with hundreds of thousands of
markers inevitably requires division of the problem into manageable parts
facilitating parallel processing, parts corresponding to individual genetic
variants, pathways, or genes, for example. Here we utilize a straightforward
formulation according to which the genome is divided into blocks of nearby
correlated genetic markers, tested jointly for association with the phenotypes.
This formulation is computationally feasible, reduces the number of tests, and
lets the methods take advantage of combining information over several
correlated variables not only on the phenotype side, but also on the genotype
side.
  Our experiments show that canonical correlation analysis has higher power
than alternative methods, while remaining computationally tractable for routine
use in the GWAS setting, provided the number of samples is sufficient compared
to the numbers of phenotype and genotype variables tested. Sparse canonical
correlation analysis and regression models with latent confounding factors show
promising performance when the number of samples is small.
