MOTIVATION: Admixed populations offer a unique opportunity for mapping diseases that have large disease allele frequency differences between ancestral populations. However, association analysis in such populations is challenging because population stratification may lead to association with loci unlinked to the disease locus. METHODS AND RESULTS: We show that local ancestry at a test single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) may confound with the association signal and ignoring it can lead to spurious association. We demonstrate theoretically that adjustment for local ancestry at the test SNP is sufficient to remove the spurious association regardless of the mechanism of population stratification, whether due to local or global ancestry differences among study subjects; however, global ancestry adjustment procedures may not be effective. We further develop two novel association tests that adjust for local ancestry. Our first test is based on a conditional likelihood framework which models the distribution of the test SNP given disease status and flanking marker genotypes. A key advantage of this test lies in its ability to incorporate different directions of association in the ancestral populations. Our second test, which is computationally simpler, is based on logistic regression, with adjustment for local ancestry proportion. We conducted extensive simulations and found that the Type I error rates of our tests are under control; however, the global adjustment procedures yielded inflated Type I error rates when stratification is due to local ancestry difference.
MOTIVATION: Admixed populations offer a unique opportunity for mapping diseases that have large disease allele frequency differences between ancestral populations. However, association analysis in such populations is challenging because population stratification may lead to association with loci unlinked to the disease locus. METHODS AND RESULTS: We show that local ancestry at a test single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) may confound with the association signal and ignoring it can lead to spurious association. We demonstrate theoretically that adjustment for local ancestry at the test SNP is sufficient to remove the spurious association regardless of the mechanism of population stratification, whether due to local or global ancestry differences among study subjects; however, global ancestry adjustment procedures may not be effective. We further develop two novel association tests that adjust for local ancestry. Our first test is based on a conditional likelihood framework which models the distribution of the test SNP given disease status and flanking marker genotypes. A key advantage of this test lies in its ability to incorporate different directions of association in the ancestral populations. Our second test, which is computationally simpler, is based on logistic regression, with adjustment for local ancestry proportion. We conducted extensive simulations and found that the Type I error rates of our tests are under control; however, the global adjustment procedures yielded inflated Type I error rates when stratification is due to local ancestry difference.
Authors: Alkes L Price; Nick J Patterson; Robert M Plenge; Michael E Weinblatt; Nancy A Shadick; David Reich Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-07-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Matthew P Conomos; Cecelia A Laurie; Adrienne M Stilp; Stephanie M Gogarten; Caitlin P McHugh; Sarah C Nelson; Tamar Sofer; Lindsay Fernández-Rhodes; Anne E Justice; Mariaelisa Graff; Kristin L Young; Amanda A Seyerle; Christy L Avery; Kent D Taylor; Jerome I Rotter; Gregory A Talavera; Martha L Daviglus; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Neil Schneiderman; Gerardo Heiss; Robert C Kaplan; Nora Franceschini; Alex P Reiner; John R Shaffer; R Graham Barr; Kathleen F Kerr; Sharon R Browning; Brian L Browning; Bruce S Weir; M Larissa Avilés-Santa; George J Papanicolaou; Thomas Lumley; Adam A Szpiro; Kari E North; Ken Rice; Timothy A Thornton; Cathy C Laurie Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Shengfeng Wang; Frank Qian; Yonglan Zheng; Temidayo Ogundiran; Oladosu Ojengbede; Wei Zheng; William Blot; Katherine L Nathanson; Anselm Hennis; Barbara Nemesure; Stefan Ambs; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Dezheng Huo Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Robert Brown; Hane Lee; Ascia Eskin; Gleb Kichaev; Kirk E Lohmueller; Bruno Reversade; Stanley F Nelson; Bogdan Pasaniuc Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Jinghua Liu; Juan Pablo Lewinger; Frank D Gilliland; W James Gauderman; David V Conti Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 4.897