BACKGROUND: Robust replication is a sine qua non for the rigorous documentation of proposed associations in the genome-wide association (GWA) setting. Currently, associations of common variants reaching P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) are considered replicated. However, there is some ambiguity about the most suitable threshold for claiming genome-wide significance. METHODS: We defined as 'borderline' associations those with P > 5 × 10(-8) and P ≤ 1 × 10(-7). The eligible associations were retrieved using the 'Catalog of Published Genome-Wide Association Studies'. For each association we assessed whether it reached P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) with inclusion of additional data from subsequent GWA studies. RESULTS: Thirty-four eligible genotype-phenotype associations were evaluated with data and clarifications contributed from diverse investigators. Replication data from subsequent GWA studies could be obtained for 26 of them. Of those, 19 associations (73%) reached P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) for the same or a related trait implicating either the exact same allele or one in very high linkage disequilibrium and 17 reached P < 10(-8). If the seven associations that did not reach P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) when additional data were considered are assumed to have been false-positives, the false-discovery rate for borderline associations is estimated to be 27% [95% confidence interval (CI) 12-48%]. For five associations, the current P-value is > 10(-6) [corresponding false-discovery rate 19% (95% CI 7-39%)]. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion, but not all, of the associations with borderline genome-wide significance represent replicable, possibly genuine associations. Our empirical evaluation suggests a possible relaxation in the current GWS threshold.
BACKGROUND: Robust replication is a sine qua non for the rigorous documentation of proposed associations in the genome-wide association (GWA) setting. Currently, associations of common variants reaching P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) are considered replicated. However, there is some ambiguity about the most suitable threshold for claiming genome-wide significance. METHODS: We defined as 'borderline' associations those with P > 5 × 10(-8) and P ≤ 1 × 10(-7). The eligible associations were retrieved using the 'Catalog of Published Genome-Wide Association Studies'. For each association we assessed whether it reached P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) with inclusion of additional data from subsequent GWA studies. RESULTS: Thirty-four eligible genotype-phenotype associations were evaluated with data and clarifications contributed from diverse investigators. Replication data from subsequent GWA studies could be obtained for 26 of them. Of those, 19 associations (73%) reached P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) for the same or a related trait implicating either the exact same allele or one in very high linkage disequilibrium and 17 reached P < 10(-8). If the seven associations that did not reach P ≤ 5 × 10(-8) when additional data were considered are assumed to have been false-positives, the false-discovery rate for borderline associations is estimated to be 27% [95% confidence interval (CI) 12-48%]. For five associations, the current P-value is > 10(-6) [corresponding false-discovery rate 19% (95% CI 7-39%)]. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion, but not all, of the associations with borderline genome-wide significance represent replicable, possibly genuine associations. Our empirical evaluation suggests a possible relaxation in the current GWS threshold.
Authors: Hui Wang; Krystal R St Julien; David K Stevenson; Thomas J Hoffmann; John S Witte; Laura C Lazzeroni; Mark A Krasnow; Cecele C Quaintance; John W Oehlert; Laura L Jelliffe-Pawlowski; Jeffrey B Gould; Gary M Shaw; Hugh M O'Brodovich Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Carolyn M Hutter; Leah E Mechanic; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Peter Kraft; Elizabeth M Gillanders Journal: Genet Epidemiol Date: 2013-10-05 Impact factor: 2.135
Authors: Richard B Kennedy; Inna G Ovsyannikova; Iana H Haralambieva; Nathaniel D Lambert; V Shane Pankratz; Gregory A Poland Journal: Immunogenetics Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 2.846
Authors: Feifei Tao; Gary W Beecham; Adriana P Rebelo; John Svaren; Susan H Blanton; John J Moran; Camila Lopez-Anido; Jasper M Morrow; Lisa Abreu; Devon Rizzo; Callyn A Kirk; Xingyao Wu; Shawna Feely; Camiel Verhamme; Mario A Saporta; David N Herrmann; John W Day; Charlotte J Sumner; Thomas E Lloyd; Jun Li; Sabrina W Yum; Franco Taroni; Frank Baas; Byung-Ok Choi; Davide Pareyson; Steven S Scherer; Mary M Reilly; Michael E Shy; Stephan Züchner Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Daniel J Benjamin; David Cesarini; Christopher F Chabris; Edward L Glaeser; David I Laibson; Vilmundur Guðnason; Tamara B Harris; Lenore J Launer; Shaun Purcell; Albert Vernon Smith; Magnus Johannesson; Patrik K E Magnusson; Jonathan P Beauchamp; Nicholas A Christakis; Craig S Atwood; Benjamin Hebert; Jeremy Freese; Robert M Hauser; Taissa S Hauser; Alexander Grankvist; Christina M Hultman; Paul Lichtenstein Journal: Annu Rev Econom Date: 2012-06-18