Literature DB >> 26292643

About the power of biostatistics in sibling analysis-comparison of empirical and simulated data.

Nicole von Wurmb-Schwark1,2, Elena Podruks1, Thorsten Schwark3,4, Wolfgang Göpel5, Rolf Fimmers6, Micaela Poetsch7.   

Abstract

The determination of potential sibship is a common task in routine kinship analysis, but often the putative parents are not available for analysis anymore. Then, a sibling analysis has to be conducted investigating only the potential siblings, thus reducing the power of the conclusion. In an attempt to determine meaningfulness of biostatistical calculations, 346 dizygotic twin pairs, 30 confirmed half siblings, and 112 unrelated people (to generate 6216 pair comparisons) were studied, all genetically typed using at least the Powerplex® 16 STRs. From every pair, the probabilities for a full sibship (identical parents) and half sibship (different fathers) were calculated using a commercially available computer program. Additionally, we simulated marker data for one million pairs of full sibs, half sibs, and unrelated persons each. Ninety-five percent of full sibling pairs demonstrated a likelihood ratio (LR) > 9 (W-value > 90 %) and less than 4% of these showed a LR < 3 (W-value < 75%) for full sibship after analysis of 15 STRs. The results for half siblings are less unambiguous. Here, only 57% achieved a LR > 9 and 23% a LR < 3. Regarding the unrelated pairs, more than 90% had a LR < 1/9 and only 2% reached a LR > 9. All in all, our results show that 15 to 20 STRs have sufficient power for analyses in kinship. Moreover, our data provide a statistical basis for the determination of the information content of a LR/W-value in a sibship case. Investigating an identical number of full siblings and unrelated pairs, it could be shown that 92% of pairs with a LR > 9 for full sibship probability really are full siblings. So, setting a cutoff level for full sibship at LR > 9, less than 10% of pairs will be wrongly assumed as full siblings even though they are unrelated.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Forensic; Kinship; Multiplex PCR; STR analysis; Sibling; Sibship

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26292643     DOI: 10.1007/s00414-015-1252-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Legal Med        ISSN: 0937-9827            Impact factor:   2.686


  19 in total

1.  Distinguishing full siblings from half-siblings in limited pedigrees.

Authors:  R E Wenk; F A Chiafari
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.157

Review 2.  How frequent is heteropaternal superfecundation?

Authors:  R E Wenk; T Houtz; M Brooks; F A Chiafari
Journal:  Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma)       Date:  1992

3.  Genetic identification of highly putrefied bodies using DNA from soft tissues.

Authors:  Thorsten Schwark; Anke Heinrich; Nicole von Wurmb-Schwark
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2010-12-18       Impact factor: 2.686

4.  Specificity of sibship determination using the ABI Identifiler multiplex system.

Authors:  Thomas M Reid; Caitlin A Wolf; Christopher M Kraemer; Susannie C Lee; Michael L Baird; Richard F Lee
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.832

5.  Systematic evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of sibship determination by using 15 STR loci.

Authors:  Chang En Pu; Adrian Linacre
Journal:  J Forensic Leg Med       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 1.614

6.  Causes of delivery and outcomes of very preterm twins stratified to zygosity.

Authors:  Juliane Spiegler; Christoph Härtel; Lena Schulz; Nicole von Wurmb-Schwark; Thomas Hoehn; Angela Kribs; Helmut Küster; Jens Siegel; Christian Wieg; Jan Weichert; Egbert Herting; Wolfgang Göpel
Journal:  Twin Res Hum Genet       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.587

7.  Possible pitfalls in motherless paternity analysis with related putative fathers.

Authors:  Nicole von Wurmb-Schwark; Victoria Mályusz; Eva Simeoni; Eberhard Lignitz; Micaela Poetsch
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 2.395

8.  Paternity identification in twins with different fathers.

Authors:  H L Lu; C X Wang; F Q Wu; J J Li
Journal:  J Forensic Sci       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 1.832

9.  Determination of sibship by PCR-amplified short tandem repeat analysis in Taiwan.

Authors:  C H Tzeng; J Y Lyou; Y R Chen; H Y Hu; J S Lin; S Y Wang; J C Lee
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.157

10.  The incidence of superfecundation and of double paternity in the general population.

Authors:  W H James
Journal:  Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma)       Date:  1993
View more
  2 in total

1.  Kinship analysis: assessment of related vs unrelated based on defined pedigrees.

Authors:  Stefania Turrina; Melissa Ferrian; Stefano Caratti; Emanuela Cosentino; Domenico De Leo
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2015-11-20       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Letter to the Editor: comments on biostatistical power of sibling analysis by STR markers.

Authors:  Ranajit Chakraborty
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 2.686

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.