Literature DB >> 23594495

Single-variant and multi-variant trend tests for genetic association with next-generation sequencing that are robust to sequencing error.

Wonkuk Kim1, Douglas Londono, Lisheng Zhou, Jinchuan Xing, Alejandro Q Nato, Anthony Musolf, Tara C Matise, Stephen J Finch, Derek Gordon.   

Abstract

As with any new technology, next-generation sequencing (NGS) has potential advantages and potential challenges. One advantage is the identification of multiple causal variants for disease that might otherwise be missed by SNP-chip technology. One potential challenge is misclassification error (as with any emerging technology) and the issue of power loss due to multiple testing. Here, we develop an extension of the linear trend test for association that incorporates differential misclassification error and may be applied to any number of SNPs. We call the statistic the linear trend test allowing for error, applied to NGS, or LTTae,NGS. This statistic allows for differential misclassification. The observed data are phenotypes for unrelated cases and controls, coverage, and the number of putative causal variants for every individual at all SNPs. We simulate data considering multiple factors (disease mode of inheritance, genotype relative risk, causal variant frequency, sequence error rate in cases, sequence error rate in controls, number of loci, and others) and evaluate type I error rate and power for each vector of factor settings. We compare our results with two recently published NGS statistics. Also, we create a fictitious disease model based on downloaded 1000 Genomes data for 5 SNPs and 388 individuals, and apply our statistic to those data. We find that the LTTae,NGS maintains the correct type I error rate in all simulations (differential and non-differential error), while the other statistics show large inflation in type I error for lower coverage. Power for all three methods is approximately the same for all three statistics in the presence of non-differential error. Application of our statistic to the 1000 Genomes data suggests that, for the data downloaded, there is a 1.5% sequence misclassification rate over all SNPs. Finally, application of the multi-variant form of LTTae,NGS shows high power for a number of simulation settings, although it can have lower power than the corresponding single-variant simulation results, most probably due to our specification of multi-variant SNP correlation values. In conclusion, our LTTae,NGS addresses two key challenges with NGS disease studies; first, it allows for differential misclassification when computing the statistic; and second, it addresses the multiple-testing issue in that there is a multi-variant form of the statistic that has only one degree of freedom, and provides a single p value, no matter how many loci.
Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23594495      PMCID: PMC3863939          DOI: 10.1159/000346824

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Hered        ISSN: 0001-5652            Impact factor:   0.444


  73 in total

1.  Undetected genotyping errors cause apparent overtransmission of common alleles in the transmission/disequilibrium test.

Authors:  Adele A Mitchell; David J Cutler; Aravinda Chakravarti
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-02-13       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 2.  TP53 Arg72Pro polymorphism and colorectal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Issa J Dahabreh; Helena Linardou; Peggy Bouzika; Vasileia Varvarigou; Samuel Murray
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Extending rare-variant testing strategies: analysis of noncoding sequence and imputed genotypes.

Authors:  Matthew Zawistowski; Shyam Gopalakrishnan; Jun Ding; Yun Li; Sara Grimm; Sebastian Zöllner
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Effects of differential genotyping error rate on the type I error probability of case-control studies.

Authors:  Valentina Moskvina; Nick Craddock; Peter Holmans; Michael J Owen; Michael C O'Donovan
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2006-04-06       Impact factor: 0.444

5.  Next-generation phage display: integrating and comparing available molecular tools to enable cost-effective high-throughput analysis.

Authors:  Emmanuel Dias-Neto; Diana N Nunes; Ricardo J Giordano; Jessica Sun; Gregory H Botz; Kuan Yang; João C Setubal; Renata Pasqualini; Wadih Arap
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Collaborative analysis of alpha-synuclein gene promoter variability and Parkinson disease.

Authors:  Demetrius M Maraganore; Mariza de Andrade; Alexis Elbaz; Matthew J Farrer; John P Ioannidis; Rejko Krüger; Walter A Rocca; Nicole K Schneider; Timothy G Lesnick; Sarah J Lincoln; Mary M Hulihan; Jan O Aasly; Tetsuo Ashizawa; Marie-Christine Chartier-Harlin; Harvey Checkoway; Carlo Ferrarese; Georgios Hadjigeorgiou; Nobutaka Hattori; Hideshi Kawakami; Jean-Charles Lambert; Timothy Lynch; George D Mellick; Spiridon Papapetropoulos; Abbas Parsian; Aldo Quattrone; Olaf Riess; Eng-King Tan; Christine Van Broeckhoven
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Data quality control in genetic case-control association studies.

Authors:  Carl A Anderson; Fredrik H Pettersson; Geraldine M Clarke; Lon R Cardon; Andrew P Morris; Krina T Zondervan
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 8.  New DNA sequencing technologies open a promising era for cancer research and treatment.

Authors:  Leandro Sastre
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 9.  Steroid 5-{alpha}-reductase Type 2 (SRD5a2) gene polymorphisms and risk of prostate cancer: a HuGE review.

Authors:  Jun Li; Ralph J Coates; Marta Gwinn; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-11-13       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  A method to address differential bias in genotyping in large-scale association studies.

Authors:  Vincent Plagnol; Jason D Cooper; John A Todd; David G Clayton
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2007-04-05       Impact factor: 5.917

View more
  2 in total

1.  Impact of genotyping errors on statistical power of association tests in genomic analyses: A case study.

Authors:  Lin Hou; Ning Sun; Shrikant Mane; Fred Sayward; Nallakkandi Rajeevan; Kei-Hoi Cheung; Kelly Cho; Saiju Pyarajan; Mihaela Aslan; Perry Miller; Philip D Harvey; J Michael Gaziano; John Concato; Hongyu Zhao
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2016-12-26       Impact factor: 2.135

2.  Some surprising twists on the road to discovering the contribution of rare variants to complex diseases.

Authors:  Duncan C Thomas
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 0.444

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.