Dataset Information

Validity and power of association testing in family-based sampling designs: evidence for and against the common wisdom.

ABSTRACT: Current common wisdom posits that association analyses using family-based designs have inflated type 1 error rates (if relationships are ignored) and independent controls are more powerful than familial controls. We explore these suppositions. We show theoretically that family-based designs can have deflated type-error rates. Through simulation, we examine the validity and power of family designs for several scenarios: cases from randomly or selectively ascertained pedigrees; and familial or independent controls. Family structures considered are as follows: sibships, nuclear families, moderate-sized and extended pedigrees. Three methods were considered with the ?(2) test for trend: variance correction (VC), weighted (weights assigned to account for genetic similarity), and naïve (ignoring relatedness) as well as the Modified Quasi-likelihood Score (MQLS) test. Selectively ascertained pedigrees had similar levels of disease enrichment; random ascertainment had no such restriction. Data for 1,000 cases and 1,000 controls were created under the null and alternate models. The VC and MQLS methods were always valid. The naïve method was anti-conservative if independent controls were used and valid or conservative in designs with familial controls. The weighted association method was generally valid for independent controls, and was conservative for familial controls. With regard to power, independent controls were more powerful for small-to-moderate selectively ascertained pedigrees, but familial and independent controls were equivalent in the extended pedigrees and familial controls were consistently more powerful for all randomly ascertained pedigrees. These results suggest a more complex situation than previously assumed, which has important implications for study design and analysis.

SUBMITTER: Knight S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3055958 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity and power of association testing in family-based sampling designs: evidence for and against the common wisdom.

Knight Stacey S Camp Nicola J NJ

Genetic epidemiology 20110216 3

Current common wisdom posits that association analyses using family-based designs have inflated type 1 error rates (if relationships are ignored) and independent controls are more powerful than familial controls. We explore these suppositions. We show theoretically that family-based designs can have deflated type-error rates. Through simulation, we examine the validity and power of family designs for several scenarios: cases from randomly or selectively ascertained pedigrees; and familial or ind ...[more]

PMID: 21328615

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreviously, family-based designs and high-risk pedigrees have illustrated value for the discovery of high- and intermediate-risk germline breast cancer susceptibility genes. However, genetic heterogeneity is a major obstacle hindering progress. New strategies and analytic approaches will be necessary to make further advances. One opportunity with the potential to address heterogeneity via improved characterization of disease is the growing availability of multisource databases. Specific to advances involving family-based designs are resources that include family structure, such as the Utah Population Database (UPDB). To illustrate the broad utility and potential power of multisource databases, we describe two different novel family-based approaches to reduce heterogeneity in the UPDB.MethodsOur first approach focuses on using pedigree-informed breast tumor phenotypes in gene mapping. Our second approach focuses on the identification of families with similar pleiotropies. We use a novel network-inspired clustering technique to explore multi-cancer signatures for high-risk breast cancer families.ResultsOur first approach identifies a genome-wide significant breast cancer locus at 2q13 [P = 1.6 × 10-8, logarithm of the odds (LOD) equivalent 6.64]. In the region, IL1A and IL1B are of particular interest, key cytokine genes involved in inflammation. Our second approach identifies five multi-cancer risk patterns. These clusters include expected coaggregations (such as breast cancer with prostate cancer, ovarian cancer, and melanoma), and also identify novel patterns, including coaggregation with uterine, thyroid, and bladder cancers.ConclusionsOur results suggest pedigree-informed tumor phenotypes can map genes for breast cancer, and that various different cancer pleiotropies exist for high-risk breast cancer pedigrees.ImpactBoth methods illustrate the potential for decreasing etiologic heterogeneity that large, population-based multisource databases can provide.See all articles in this CEBP Focus section, "Modernizing Population Science."

Dataset Information

Validity and power of association testing in family-based sampling designs: evidence for and against the common wisdom.

Publications

Validity and power of association testing in family-based sampling designs: evidence for and against the common wisdom.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets