Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24379823›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2013

On multi-marker tests for association in case-control studies.

Margaret A Taub, Holger R Schwender, Samuel G Younkin, Thomas A Louis, Ingo Ruczinski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Margaret A TaubDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD, USA.
Holger R SchwenderMathematical Institute, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf Düsseldorf, Germany.
Samuel G YounkinDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD, USA.
Thomas A LouisDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ingo RuczinskiDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Preprocessing and Analysis Tools for High-Throughput TechnologiesR01GM083084 · NIGMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI IRIZARRY, RAFAEL ANGEL · 2007 to 2018
$4.4M
Novel Statistical Methods for Gene-Environment Interactions in Complex DiseasesR01HL090577 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI RUCZINSKI, INGO · 2007 to 2009
$1.1M
Methods development and secondary analyses for an oral clefts association studyR03DE021437 · NIDCR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI RUCZINSKI, INGO · 2011 to 2012
$477k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL090577NIDCR NIH HHS R03 DE021437NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM083084
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAs) have identified thousands of DNA loci associated with a variety of traits. Statistical inference is almost always based on single marker hypothesis tests of association and the respective p-values with Bonferroni correction. Since commercially available genomic arrays interrogate hundreds of thousands or even millions of loci simultaneously, many causal yet undetected loci are believed to exist because the conditional power to achieve a genome-wide significance level can be low, in particular for markers with small effect sizes and low minor allele frequencies and in studies with modest sample size. However, the correlation between neighboring markers in the human genome due to linkage disequilibrium (LD) resulting in correlated marker test statistics can be incorporated into multi-marker hypothesis tests, thereby increasing power to detect association. Herein, we establish a theoretical benchmark by quantifying the maximum power achievable for multi-marker tests of association in case-control studies, achievable only when the causal marker is known. Using that genotype correlations within an LD block translate into an asymptotically multivariate normal distribution for score test statistics, we develop a set of weights for the markers that maximize the non-centrality parameter, and assess the relative loss of power for other approaches. We find that the method of Conneely and Boehnke (2007) based on the maximum absolute test statistic observed in an LD block is a practical and powerful method in a variety of settings. We also explore the effect on the power that prior biological or functional knowledge used to narrow down the locus of the causal marker can have, and conclude that this prior knowledge has to be very strong and specific for the power to approach the maximum achievable level, or even beat the power observed for methods such as the one proposed by Conneely and Boehnke (2007).

Indexed as

genome-wide association studieslinkage disequilibriummulti-marker testsmultiplicity adjustmentsingle nucleotide polymorphisms

Identifiers

PMID24379823
PMCPMC3863805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.