ArticleMalaria journal2023
Genome-wide association testing in malaria studies in the presence of overdominance.
Article in Malaria journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Genome-wide Association Studies to Functional Variants: ARL14 Cis-regulatory Variants Are Associated With Severe Malaria.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn human genetics, heterozygote advantage (heterosis) has been detected in studies that focused on specific genes but not in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). For example, heterosis is believed to confer resistance to certain strains of malaria in patients heterozygous for the sickle-cell gene, haemoglobin S (HbS). Yet the power of allelic tests can be substantially diminished by heterosis. Since GWAS (and haplotype-associations) also utilize allelic tests, it is unclear to what degree GWAS could underachieve because heterosis is ignored.
methodsIn this study, a two-step approach to genetic association testing in malaria studies in a GWAS setting that may enhance the power of the tests was proposed, by identifying the underlying genetic model first before applying the association tests. Generalized linear models for dominant, recessive, additive, and heterotic effects were fitted and model selection was performed. This was achieved via tests of significance using the MAX and allelic tests, noting the minimum p-values across all the models and the proportion of tests that a given genetic model was deemed the best. An example dataset, based on 17 SNPs, from a robust genetic association study and simulated genotype datasets, were used to illustrate the method. Case-control genotype data on malaria from Kenya and Gambia were used for validation. RESULTS AND
conclusionResults showed that the allelic test returned some false negatives under the heterosis model, suggesting reduced power in testing genetic association. Disparities were observed for some chromosomes in the Kenyan and Gambian datasets, including the sex chromosomes. Thus, GWAS and haplotype associations should be treated with caution, unless the underlying genetic model had been determined.
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.