ArticleJournal of human genetics2004
Designing a multistage, SNP-based, genome screen for common diseases.
Article in Journal of human genetics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pharmacogenetics of glucose-lowering drug treatment: a systematic review.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2007Pooled it
- Genome-wide germline analyses on cancer susceptibility and GeMDBJ database: Gastric cancer as an example.Cancer science · 2010Review
- Sample-size properties of a case-control association analysis of multistage SNP studies for identifying disease susceptibility genes.Journal of human genetics · 2008Article
- The confidence interval of allelic odds ratios under the Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium.Journal of human genetics · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A genome-wide linkage equilibrium mapping is an emerging strategy to identify risk-modifying genes for common diseases, despite unsettled controversies upon many aspects, including its premises, designs, marker choices and cost benefits. One large-scale attempt in Japan aims to identify disease-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for five diseases among the Japanese population: Alzheimer's disease, gastric cancer, diabetes, hypertension and asthma. Following an initial screening of c.a. 100,000 SNPs on 940 subjects (five diseases x 188 patients) to select about 2,000 SNPs, we compared which subsequent screening design is more appropriate, and an additional one or two screens to further narrow down any disease-associated SNPs within a fixed total volume of 15,040,000 typings (2,000 SNPs x five diseases x 1,504 subjects, comprising 752 cases and 752 controls). We employed a Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the probability of identifying truly disease-associated SNPs. The results suggest the single additional stage design (i.e., total two-stage design including the initial screening of 100,000 SNPs) was more practicable for the simple reason that the gain in probability is considered insufficient relative to an associated increase in study complexity in the three-stage design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15635486What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.