Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30590456›Full record

ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2020

Analysis in case-control sequencing association studies with different sequencing depths.

Sixing Chen, Xihong Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

2 authors.

Sixing ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Avenue, Building 2, 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Xihong LinDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Avenue, Building 2, 4th Floor, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Funding

Translating Molecular and Clinical Data to Population Lung Cancer Risk AssessmentU19CA203654 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI Christopher I. Amos · 2017 to 2026
$23.7M
Training Grant in Quantitative Sciences for Cancer ResearchT32CA009337 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI QUACKENBUSH, JOHN, TRIPPA, LORENZO · 1986 to 2025
$12.3M
Statistical Methods for Analysis of Massive Genetic and Genomic Data in Cancer ResearchR35CA197449 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI XIHONG LIN · 2015 to 2026
$10.9M
Superfund Metal Mixtures, Biomarkers and NeurodevelopmentP42ES016454 · NIEHS · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI BELLINGER, DAVID C · 2010 to 2015
$10.1M
Statistical Methods for the Spatio-Temporal Assessment of Social Disparities in CancerP01CA134294 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI HANEUSE, SEBASTIEN, HERNAN, MIGUEL · 2008 to 2017
$6.8M
Powering whole genome sequence-based genetic discovery for common human diseases- Extended 2021-2022.U01HG009088 · NHGRI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI LIN, XIHONG, NEALE, BENJAMIN MICHAEL · 2016 to 2021
$5.1M
Genetic risks for ALI in ARDSnet and the iSPAAR ConsortiumRC2HL101779 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WURFEL, MARK M · 2009 to 2010
$4.7M
Leveraging Family Data to Identify Genetic Variants for Sleep ApneaR01HL113338 · NHLBI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LIN, XIHONG, REDLINE, SUSAN S. · 2012 to 2016
$4.4M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA134294NCI NIH HHS R35 CA197449NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG009088NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL113338NHLBI NIH HHS RC2 HL101779NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES016454
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the advent of next-generation sequencing, investigators have access to higher quality sequencing data. However, to sequence all samples in a study using next generation sequencing can still be prohibitively expensive. One potential remedy could be to combine next generation sequencing data from cases with publicly available sequencing data for controls, but there could be a systematic difference in quality of sequenced data, such as sequencing depths, between sequenced study cases and publicly available controls. We propose a regression calibration (RC)-based method and a maximum-likelihood method for conducting an association study with such a combined sample by accounting for differential sequencing errors between cases and controls. The methods allow for adjusting for covariates, such as population stratification as confounders. Both methods control type I error and have comparable power to analysis conducted using the true genotype with sufficiently high but different sequencing depths. We show that the RC method allows for analysis using naive variance estimate (closely approximates true variance in practice) and standard software under certain circumstances. We evaluate the performance of the proposed methods using simulation studies and apply our methods to a combined data set of exome sequenced acute lung injury cases and healthy controls from the 1000 Genomes project.

Indexed as

Genetic Association StudiesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalCase-Control StudiesComputer SimulationHumansGenetic association studiesHypothesis testingMaximum likelihoodMisclassificationRegression calibrationSequencing depth

Identifiers

PMID30590456
PMCPMC7308042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.