Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18671250›Full record

ArticleGenetic epidemiology2009

A computationally efficient hypothesis testing method for epistasis analysis using multifactor dimensionality reduction.

Kristine A Pattin, Bill C White, Nate Barney, Jiang Gui, Heather H Nelson, Karl T Kelsey, Angeline S Andrew, Margaret R Karagas, Jason H Moore

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. How National Culture Influences the Speed of COVID-19 Spread: Three Cross-Cultural Studies.Cross-cultural research : official journal of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Journal of personalized medicine · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. SNCA and mTOR Pathway Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Interact to Modulate the Age at Onset of Parkinson's Disease.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Kristine A PattinComputational Genetics Laboratory, Department of Genetics, Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, New Hampshire 03756, USA.
Bill C White
Nate Barney
Jiang Gui
Heather H Nelson
Karl T Kelsey
Angeline S Andrew
Margaret R Karagas
Jason H Moore

Funding

Translational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Steven D Leach · 1985 to 2026
$91.3M
VARIATION IN BIOACCUMULATION AND BIOMAGNIFICATION OF METALS IN NORTHERN US LAKESP42ES007373 · NIEHS · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI STANTON, BRUCE A. · 1995 to 2019
$52.0M
Translational Research Support CoreP30ES000002 · NIEHS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI SUSAN A KORRICK · 1985 to 2026
$44.6M
THE ROLE OF CAL IN CIF-MEDIATED DEGRADATION OF CFTRP20RR018787 · NCRR · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI O'TOOLE, GEORGE A. · 2003 to 2011
$21.9M
VANADIUM AND HUMAN HEALTHP42ES005947 · NIEHS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI KELSEY, KARL TIMOTHY · 1992 to 2006
$19.6M
NONMELANOMA SKIN CANCER IN NEW HAMPSHIRER01CA057494 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI KARAGAS, MARGARET RITA · 1993 to 2015
$10.9M
Bioinformatics Strategies: Biodefense Vaccine ResearchR01AI059694 · NIAID · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI MOORE, JASON H. · 2004 to 2012
$4.5M
MOLECULAR EPIDEMIOLOGY OF NON-MELANOMA SKIN CANCERR01CA082354 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI NELSON, HEATHER HAMMOND · 1999 to 2011
$4.2M
Machine Learning Prediction of Cancer SusceptibilityR01LM009012 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MOORE, JASON H. · 2006 to 2014
$3.3M
DNA Repair and Bladder CancerR03CA099500 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI ANDREW, ANGELINE SANDERSON · 2003 to 2004
$158k
NCI NIH HHS CA099500NCI NIH HHS CA57494NCI NIH HHS CA82354NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023108NCI NIH HHS R01 CA057494NCI NIH HHS R01 CA082354NCI NIH HHS R03 CA099500NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR018787NCRR NIH HHS RR018787NIAID NIH HHS AI59694NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI059694NIEHS NIH HHS ES00002NIEHS NIH HHS ES05947NIEHS NIH HHS ES07373NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES000002NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES005947NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES007373NLM NIH HHS LM009012NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) was developed as a nonparametric and model-free data mining method for detecting, characterizing, and interpreting epistasis in the absence of significant main effects in genetic and epidemiologic studies of complex traits such as disease susceptibility. The goal of MDR is to change the representation of the data using a constructive induction algorithm to make nonadditive interactions easier to detect using any classification method such as naïve Bayes or logistic regression. Traditionally, MDR constructed variables have been evaluated with a naïve Bayes classifier that is combined with 10-fold cross validation to obtain an estimate of predictive accuracy or generalizability of epistasis models. Traditionally, we have used permutation testing to statistically evaluate the significance of models obtained through MDR. The advantage of permutation testing is that it controls for false positives due to multiple testing. The disadvantage is that permutation testing is computationally expensive. This is an important issue that arises in the context of detecting epistasis on a genome-wide scale. The goal of the present study was to develop and evaluate several alternatives to large-scale permutation testing for assessing the statistical significance of MDR models. Using data simulated from 70 different epistasis models, we compared the power and type I error rate of MDR using a 1,000-fold permutation test with hypothesis testing using an extreme value distribution (EVD). We find that this new hypothesis testing method provides a reasonable alternative to the computationally expensive 1,000-fold permutation test and is 50 times faster. We then demonstrate this new method by applying it to a genetic epidemiology study of bladder cancer susceptibility that was previously analyzed using MDR and assessed using a 1,000-fold permutation test.

Indexed as

Epistasis, GeneticModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalAlgorithmsDatabases, GeneticHumansMolecular EpidemiologyPenetranceUrinary Bladder Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID18671250
PMCPMC2700860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.