Dataset Information

Quantifying uncertainty in genotype calls.

ABSTRACT:

Motivation

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are used to discover genes underlying complex, heritable disorders for which less powerful study designs have failed in the past. The number of GWAS has skyrocketed recently with findings reported in top journals and the mainstream media. Microarrays are the genotype calling technology of choice in GWAS as they permit exploration of more than a million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) simultaneously. The starting point for the statistical analyses used by GWAS to determine association between loci and disease is making genotype calls (AA, AB or BB). However, the raw data, microarray probe intensities, are heavily processed before arriving at these calls. Various sophisticated statistical procedures have been proposed for transforming raw data into genotype calls. We find that variability in microarray output quality across different SNPs, different arrays and different sample batches have substantial influence on the accuracy of genotype calls made by existing algorithms. Failure to account for these sources of variability can adversely affect the quality of findings reported by the GWAS.

Results

We developed a method based on an enhanced version of the multi-level model used by CRLMM version 1. Two key differences are that we now account for variability across batches and improve the call-specific assessment of each call. The new model permits the development of quality metrics for SNPs, samples and batches of samples. Using three independent datasets, we demonstrate that the CRLMM version 2 outperforms CRLMM version 1 and the algorithm provided by Affymetrix, Birdseed. The main advantage of the new approach is that it enables the identification of low-quality SNPs, samples and batches.

Availability

Software implementing of the method described in this article is available as free and open source code in the crlmm R/BioConductor package.

Supplementary information

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

SUBMITTER: Carvalho BS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2804295 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quantifying uncertainty in genotype calls.

Carvalho Benilton S BS Louis Thomas A TA Irizarry Rafael A RA

Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 20091111 2

<h4>Motivation</h4>Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are used to discover genes underlying complex, heritable disorders for which less powerful study designs have failed in the past. The number of GWAS has skyrocketed recently with findings reported in top journals and the mainstream media. Microarrays are the genotype calling technology of choice in GWAS as they permit exploration of more than a million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) simultaneously. The starting point for the stati ...[more]

PMID: 19906825

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) (or one of its derivatives) is the primary clinical metric for characterizing sleep disordered breathing-the value of which with respect to a threshold determines severity of diagnosis and eligibility for treatment reimbursement. The index value, however, is taken as a perfect point estimate, with no measure of statistical uncertainty. Thus, current practice does not robustly account for variability in diagnosis/eligibility due to chance. In this paper, we quantify the statistical uncertainty associated with respiratory event indices for sleep disordered breathing and the effect of uncertainty on treatment eligibility.MethodsWe develop an empirical estimate of uncertainty using a non-parametric bootstrap on the interevent times, as well as a theoretical Poisson estimate reflecting the current formulation of the AHI. We then apply these methods to estimate AHI uncertainty for 2049 subjects (954/1095 M/F, age: mean 69 ± 9.1) from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).Results and conclusionsThe mean 95% empirical confidence interval width was 11.500 ± 6.208 events per hour and the mean 95% theoretical Poisson confidence interval width was 5.998 ± 2.897 events per hour, suggesting that uncertainty is likely a major confounding factor within the current diagnostic framework. Of the 278 subjects in the symptomatic population (ESS>10), 27% (76/278) had uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval. Of the 2049 subjects in the full population, 43% (880/2049) had uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval. The inclusion of subjects with uncertain diagnoses increases the number of eligible patients by 21.3% for the symptomatic population and by 84.8% for the full population. The exclusion of subjects with uncertain diagnoses given the 95% empirical confidence interval decreases the number of eligible patients by 12.4% for the symptomatic population and by 34.8% for full population. Additional analyses suggest that it is practically infeasible to gain diagnostic statistical significance through additional testing for a broad range of borderline cases. Overall, these results suggest that AHI uncertainty is a vital additional piece of information that would greatly benefit clinical practice, and that the inclusion of uncertainty in epidemiological analysis might help improve the ability for researchers to robustly link AHI with co-morbidities and long-term outcomes.

Dataset Information

Quantifying uncertainty in genotype calls.

Motivation

Results

Availability

Supplementary information

Publications

Quantifying uncertainty in genotype calls.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets