Literature DB >> 16800000

Stratified false discovery control for large-scale hypothesis testing with application to genome-wide association studies.

Lei Sun1, Radu V Craiu, Andrew D Paterson, Shelley B Bull.   

Abstract

The multiplicity problem has become increasingly important in genetic studies as the capacity for high-throughput genotyping has increased. The control of False Discovery Rate (FDR) (Benjamini and Hochberg. [1995] J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 57:289-300) has been adopted to address the problems of false positive control and low power inherent in high-volume genome-wide linkage and association studies. In many genetic studies, there is often a natural stratification of the m hypotheses to be tested. Given the FDR framework and the presence of such stratification, we investigate the performance of a stratified false discovery control approach (i.e. control or estimate FDR separately for each stratum) and compare it to the aggregated method (i.e. consider all hypotheses in a single stratum). Under the fixed rejection region framework (i.e. reject all hypotheses with unadjusted p-values less than a pre-specified level and then estimate FDR), we demonstrate that the aggregated FDR is a weighted average of the stratum-specific FDRs. Under the fixed FDR framework (i.e. reject as many hypotheses as possible and meanwhile control FDR at a pre-specified level), we specify a condition necessary for the expected total number of true positives under the stratified FDR method to be equal to or greater than that obtained from the aggregated FDR method. Application to a recent Genome-Wide Association (GWA) study by Maraganore et al. ([2005] Am. J. Hum. Genet. 77:685-693) illustrates the potential advantages of control or estimation of FDR by stratum. Our analyses also show that controlling FDR at a low rate, e.g. 5% or 10%, may not be feasible for some GWA studies. Copyright (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16800000     DOI: 10.1002/gepi.20164

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Epidemiol        ISSN: 0741-0395            Impact factor:   2.135


  72 in total

1.  False Discovery Rate Control With Groups.

Authors:  James X Hu; Hongyu Zhao; Harrison H Zhou
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 5.033

2.  Identification of lung cancer histology-specific variants applying Bayesian framework variant prioritization approaches within the TRICL and ILCCO consortia.

Authors:  Darren R Brenner; Christopher I Amos; Yonathan Brhane; Maria N Timofeeva; Neil Caporaso; Yufei Wang; David C Christiani; Heike Bickeböller; Ping Yang; Demetrius Albanes; Victoria L Stevens; Susan Gapstur; James McKay; Paolo Boffetta; David Zaridze; Neonilia Szeszenia-Dabrowska; Jolanta Lissowska; Peter Rudnai; Eleonora Fabianova; Dana Mates; Vladimir Bencko; Lenka Foretova; Vladimir Janout; Hans E Krokan; Frank Skorpen; Maiken E Gabrielsen; Lars Vatten; Inger Njølstad; Chu Chen; Gary Goodman; Mark Lathrop; Tõnu Vooder; Kristjan Välk; Mari Nelis; Andres Metspalu; Peter Broderick; Timothy Eisen; Xifeng Wu; Di Zhang; Wei Chen; Margaret R Spitz; Yongyue Wei; Li Su; Dong Xie; Jun She; Keitaro Matsuo; Fumihiko Matsuda; Hidemi Ito; Angela Risch; Joachim Heinrich; Albert Rosenberger; Thomas Muley; Hendrik Dienemann; John K Field; Olaide Raji; Ying Chen; John Gosney; Triantafillos Liloglou; Michael P A Davies; Michael Marcus; John McLaughlin; Irene Orlow; Younghun Han; Yafang Li; Xuchen Zong; Mattias Johansson; Geoffrey Liu; Shelley S Tworoger; Loic Le Marchand; Brian E Henderson; Lynne R Wilkens; Juncheng Dai; Hongbing Shen; Richard S Houlston; Maria T Landi; Paul Brennan; Rayjean J Hung
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 4.944

3.  Prioritized subset analysis: improving power in genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Chun Li; Mingyao Li; Ethan M Lange; Richard M Watanabe
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 0.444

4.  Enriching the analysis of genomewide association studies with hierarchical modeling.

Authors:  Gary K Chen; John S Witte
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2007-06-26       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Identifying common genetic variants in blood pressure due to polygenic pleiotropy with associated phenotypes.

Authors:  Ole A Andreassen; Linda K McEvoy; Wesley K Thompson; Yunpeng Wang; Sjur Reppe; Andrew J Schork; Verena Zuber; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Kaare Gautvik; Pål Aukrust; Tom H Karlsen; Srdjan Djurovic; Rahul S Desikan; Anders M Dale
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 10.190

6.  A Comprehensive Analysis of Nuclear-Encoded Mitochondrial Genes in Schizophrenia.

Authors:  Vanessa F Gonçalves; Carolina Cappi; Christian M Hagen; Adolfo Sequeira; Marquis P Vawter; Andriy Derkach; Clement C Zai; Paula L Hedley; Jonas Bybjerg-Grauholm; Jennie G Pouget; Ari B Cuperfain; Patrick F Sullivan; Michael Christiansen; James L Kennedy; Lei Sun
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 13.382

7.  Gene, region and pathway level analyses in whole-genome studies.

Authors:  Omar De la Cruz; Xiaoquan Wen; Baoguan Ke; Minsun Song; Dan L Nicolae
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.135

Review 8.  Human QTL linkage mapping.

Authors:  Laura Almasy; John Blangero
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 1.082

9.  PERSONALIZED MEDICINE: FROM GENOTYPES AND MOLECULAR PHENOTYPES TOWARDS COMPUTED THERAPY.

Authors:  Oliver Stegle; Steven E Brenner; Quaid Morris; Jennifer Listgarten
Journal:  Pac Symp Biocomput       Date:  2013

10.  Genome-wide association analyses of North American Rheumatoid Arthritis Consortium and Framingham Heart Study data utilizing genome-wide linkage results.

Authors:  Yun Joo Yoo; Dushanthi Pinnaduwage; Daryl Waggott; Shelley B Bull; Lei Sun
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2009-12-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.