Literature DB >> 11170893

Problems in the definition, interpretation, and evaluation of genetic heterogeneity.

A S Whittemore1, J Halpern.   

Abstract

Suppose that we wish to classify families with multiple cases of disease into one of three categories: those that segregate mutations of a gene of interest, those which segregate mutations of other genes, and those whose disease is due to nonhereditary factors or chance. Among families in the first two categories (the hereditary families), we wish to estimate the proportion, p, of families that segregate mutations of the gene of interest. Although this proportion is a commonly accepted concept, it is well defined only with an unambiguous definition of "family." Even then, extraneous factors such as family sizes and structures can cause p to vary across different populations and, within a population, to be estimated differently by different studies. Restrictive assumptions about the disease are needed, in order to avoid this undesirable variation. The assumptions require that mutations of all disease-causing genes (i) have no effect on family size, (ii) have very low frequencies, and (iii) have penetrances that satisfy certain constraints. Despite the unverifiability of these assumptions, linkage studies often invoke them to estimate p, using the admixture likelihood introduced by Smith and discussed by Ott. We argue against this common practice, because (1) it also requires the stronger assumption of equal penetrances for all etiologically relevant genes; (2) even if all assumptions are met, estimates of p are sensitive to misspecification of the unknown phenocopy rate; (3) even if all the necessary assumptions are met and the phenocopy rate is correctly specified, estimates of p that are obtained by linkage programs such as HOMOG and GENEHUNTER are based on the wrong likelihood and therefore are biased in the presence of phenocopies. We show how to correct these estimates; but, nevertheless, we do not recommend the use of parametric heterogeneity models in linkage analysis, even merely as a tool for increasing the statistical power to detect linkage. This is because the assumptions required by these models cannot be verified, and their violation could actually decrease power. Instead, we suggest that estimation of p be postponed until the relevant genes have been identified. Then their frequencies and penetrances can be estimated on the basis of population-based samples and can be used to obtain more-robust estimates of p for specific populations.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11170893      PMCID: PMC1235278          DOI: 10.1086/318186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Genet        ISSN: 0002-9297            Impact factor:   11.025


  5 in total

1.  TESTING FOR HETEROGENEITY OF RECOMBINATION FRACTION VALUES IN HUMAN GENETICS.

Authors:  C A SMITH
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  1963-11       Impact factor: 1.670

2.  Parametric and nonparametric linkage analysis: a unified multipoint approach.

Authors:  L Kruglyak; M J Daly; M P Reeve-Daly; E S Lander
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Linkage analysis under locus heterogeneity: behaviour of the A-test in complex analyses.

Authors:  B Janssen; D Halley; L Sandkuijl
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 0.444

4.  Proportion of disease caused or prevented by a given exposure, trait or intervention.

Authors:  O S Miettinen
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1974-05       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Linkage analysis and family classification under heterogeneity.

Authors:  J Ott
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 1.670

  5 in total
  13 in total

1.  HLODs remain powerful tools for detection of linkage in the presence of genetic heterogeneity.

Authors:  Susan E Hodge; Veronica J Vieland; David A Greenberg
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 2.  Recent advances in the genetics of schizophrenia.

Authors:  D M Waterwort; A S Bassett; L M Brzustowicz
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.261

3.  Genomewide linkage scan for myopia susceptibility loci among Ashkenazi Jewish families shows evidence of linkage on chromosome 22q12.

Authors:  Dwight Stambolian; Grace Ibay; Lauren Reider; Debra Dana; Chris Moy; Melissa Schlifka; Taura Holmes; Elise Ciner; Joan E Bailey-Wilson
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-07-23       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  A genome-wide linkage scan for bone mineral density in an extended sample: evidence for linkage on 11q23 and Xq27.

Authors:  H Shen; Y-Y Zhang; J-R Long; F-H Xu; Y-Z Liu; P Xiao; L-J Zhao; D-H Xiong; Y-J Liu; V Dvornyk; S Rocha-Sanchez; P-Y Liu; J-L Li; T Conway; K M Davies; R R Recker; H-W Deng
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 6.318

5.  Association mapping of complex trait loci with context-dependent effects and unknown context variable.

Authors:  Mikko J Sillanpää; Madhuchhanda Bhattacharjee
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2006-10-08       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 6.  Morphomechanic phenotypic variability of sarcomeric cardiomyopathies: A multifactorial polygenic perspective.

Authors:  Ares Pasipoularides
Journal:  J Mol Cell Cardiol       Date:  2018-11-10       Impact factor: 5.000

7.  Linkage analysis identifies a novel locus for restless legs syndrome on chromosome 2q in a South Tyrolean population isolate.

Authors:  Irene Pichler; Fabio Marroni; Claudia Beu Volpato; James F Gusella; Christine Klein; Giorgio Casari; Alessandro De Grandi; Peter P Pramstaller
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2006-08-14       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Genetic linkage of human height is confirmed to 9q22 and Xq24.

Authors:  Yao-Zhong Liu; Peng Xiao; Yan-fang Guo; Dong-Hai Xiong; Lan-Juan Zhao; Hui Shen; Yong-Jun Liu; Volodymyr Dvornyk; Ji-Rong Long; Hong-Yi Deng; Jin-Long Li; Robert R Recker; Hong-Wen Deng
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2006-01-31       Impact factor: 4.132

9.  A novel class of tests for the detection of mitochondrial DNA-mutation involvement in diseases.

Authors:  Fengzhu Sun; Jing Cui; Haralambos Gavras; Faina Schwartz
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-04-30       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  A major lung cancer susceptibility locus maps to chromosome 6q23-25.

Authors:  J E Bailey-Wilson; C I Amos; S M Pinney; G M Petersen; M de Andrade; J S Wiest; P Fain; A G Schwartz; M You; W Franklin; C Klein; A Gazdar; H Rothschild; D Mandal; T Coons; J Slusser; J Lee; C Gaba; E Kupert; A Perez; X Zhou; D Zeng; Q Liu; Q Zhang; D Seminara; J Minna; M W Anderson
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-07-21       Impact factor: 11.025

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.