ArticleThe pharmacogenomics journal2010
Variability in GWAS analysis: the impact of genotype calling algorithm inconsistencies.
Article in The pharmacogenomics journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of genotype-calling methodologies on genome-wide association and genomic prediction in polyploids.The plant genome · 2023Article
- Identifying and mitigating batch effects in whole genome sequencing data.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- The FDA's Experience with Emerging Genomics Technologies-Past, Present, and Future.The AAPS journal · 2016Review
- Genomic Discoveries and Personalized Medicine in Neurological Diseases.Pharmaceutics · 2015Review
- Alignment of Short Reads: A Crucial Step for Application of Next-Generation Sequencing Data in Precision Medicine.Pharmaceutics · 2015Review
- KRLMM: an adaptive genotype calling method for common and low frequency variants.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Letter to the editor: expression of concern, reaffirmed.Age (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2014Article
- A colorectal cancer genome-wide association study in a Spanish cohort identifies two variants associated with colorectal cancer risk at 1p33 and 8p12.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Technical reproducibility of genotyping SNP arrays used in genome-wide association studies.PloS one · 2012Article
- Genetic background of patients from a university medical center in Manhattan: implications for personalized medicine.PloS one · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Genome-Wide Association Working Group (GWAWG) is part of a large-scale effort by the MicroArray Quality Consortium (MAQC) to assess the quality of genomic experiments, technologies and analyses for genome-wide association studies (GWASs). One of the aims of the working group is to assess the variability of genotype calls within and between different genotype calling algorithms using data for coronary artery disease from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC) and the University of Ottawa Heart Institute. Our results show that the choice of genotyping algorithm (for example, Bayesian robust linear model with Mahalanobis distance classifier (BRLMM), the corrected robust linear model with maximum-likelihood-based distances (CRLMM) and CHIAMO (developed and implemented by the WTCCC)) can introduce marked variability in the results of downstream case-control association analysis for the Affymetrix 500K array. The amount of discordance between results is influenced by how samples are combined and processed through the respective genotype calling algorithm, indicating that systematic genotype errors due to computational batch effects are propagated to the list of single-nucleotide polymorphisms found to be significantly associated with the trait of interest. Further work using HapMap samples shows that inconsistencies between Affymetrix arrays and calling algorithms can lead to genotyping errors that influence downstream analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20676070What 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.