C Amos1, M de Andrade, D Zhu. 1. Departments of Epidemiology and Biomathematics, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex., USA. camos@request.mdacc.tmc.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Multivariate tests for linkage can provide improved power over univariate tests but the type I error rates and comparative power of commonly used methods have not previously been compared. Here we studied the behavior of bivariate formulations of the variance component (VC) and Haseman-Elston (H-E) approaches. METHODS: We compared through simulation studies the bivariate H-E test with the unconstrained bivariate VC approach and with a VC approach in which the major-gene correlation is constrained to +/-1. We also compared these methods to univariate methods. RESULTS: Bivariate approaches are more powerful than univariate analyses unless the traits are very highly positively correlated. The power of the bivariate H-E test was less than the VC procedures. The constrained test was often less powerful than the unconstrained test. The empirical distributions of the bivariate H-E test and the unconstrained bivariate VC test conformed with asymptotic distributions for samples of 100 or more sibships of size 4. CONCLUSIONS: The unconstrained VC test is valuable for testing for preliminary linkages using multivariate phenotypes. The bivariate H-E test was less powerful than the bivariate VC tests. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel.
OBJECTIVES: Multivariate tests for linkage can provide improved power over univariate tests but the type I error rates and comparative power of commonly used methods have not previously been compared. Here we studied the behavior of bivariate formulations of the variance component (VC) and Haseman-Elston (H-E) approaches. METHODS: We compared through simulation studies the bivariate H-E test with the unconstrained bivariate VC approach and with a VC approach in which the major-gene correlation is constrained to +/-1. We also compared these methods to univariate methods. RESULTS: Bivariate approaches are more powerful than univariate analyses unless the traits are very highly positively correlated. The power of the bivariate H-E test was less than the VC procedures. The constrained test was often less powerful than the unconstrained test. The empirical distributions of the bivariate H-E test and the unconstrained bivariate VC test conformed with asymptotic distributions for samples of 100 or more sibships of size 4. CONCLUSIONS: The unconstrained VC test is valuable for testing for preliminary linkages using multivariate phenotypes. The bivariate H-E test was less powerful than the bivariate VC tests. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Angela J Marlow; Simon E Fisher; Clyde Francks; I Laurence MacPhie; Stacey S Cherny; Alex J Richardson; Joel B Talcott; John F Stein; Anthony P Monaco; Lon R Cardon Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2003-02-13 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Y-F Chiu; L-M Chuang; H-Y Kao; K-C Shih; M-W Lin; W-J Lee; T Quertermous; J D Curb; I Chen; B L Rodriguez; C A Hsiung Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Jean W MacCluer; Marina Scavini; Vallabh O Shah; Shelley A Cole; Sandra L Laston; V Saroja Voruganti; Susan S Paine; Alfred J Eaton; Anthony G Comuzzie; Francesca Tentori; Dorothy R Pathak; Arlene Bobelu; Jeanette Bobelu; Donica Ghahate; Mildred Waikaniwa; Philip G Zager Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2010-06-19 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Jun Wu; James S Pankow; Russell P Tracy; Kari E North; Richard H Myers; Mary E Feitosa; Michael A Province; Ingrid B Borecki Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2008-12-25 Impact factor: 5.002