ArticlePLoS genetics2012
A unified method for detecting secondary trait associations with rare variants: application to sequence data.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- STEPS: an efficient prospective likelihood approach to genetic association analyses of secondary traits in extreme phenotype sequencing.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- An adaptive test for meta-analysis of rare variant association studies.Genetic epidemiology · 2020Article
- Endophenotype best practices.International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology · 2017Review
- Guidelines for Large-Scale Sequence-Based Complex Trait Association Studies: Lessons Learned from the NHLBI Exome Sequencing Project.American journal of human genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Next-generation sequencing has made possible the detection of rare variant (RV) associations with quantitative traits (QT). Due to high sequencing cost, many studies can only sequence a modest number of selected samples with extreme QT. Therefore association testing in individual studies can be underpowered. Besides the primary trait, many clinically important secondary traits are often measured. It is highly beneficial if multiple studies can be jointly analyzed for detecting associations with commonly measured traits. However, analyzing secondary traits in selected samples can be biased if sample ascertainment is not properly modeled. Some methods exist for analyzing secondary traits in selected samples, where some burden tests can be implemented. However p-values can only be evaluated analytically via asymptotic approximations, which may not be accurate. Additionally, potentially more powerful sequence kernel association tests, variable selection-based methods, and burden tests that require permutations cannot be incorporated. To overcome these limitations, we developed a unified method for analyzing secondary trait associations with RVs (STAR) in selected samples, incorporating all RV tests. Statistical significance can be evaluated either through permutations or analytically. STAR makes it possible to apply more powerful RV tests to analyze secondary trait associations. It also enables jointly analyzing multiple cohorts ascertained under different study designs, which greatly boosts power. The performance of STAR and commonly used RV association tests were comprehensively evaluated using simulation studies. STAR was also implemented to analyze a dataset from the SardiNIA project where samples with extreme low-density lipoprotein levels were sequenced. A significant association between LDLR and systolic blood pressure was identified, which is supported by pharmacogenetic studies. In summary, for sequencing studies, STAR is an important tool for detecting secondary-trait RV associations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.