4.0 Article

Modifiers and Subtype-Specific Analyses in Whole-Genome Association Studies: A Likelihood Framework

Journal

HUMAN HEREDITY
Volume 72, Issue 1, Pages 10-20

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000327158

Keywords

Cross-disorder analysis; Modifier effects; Subtype analysis; Whole-genome association study

Funding

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [K99 MH101367] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: We propose new statistical methods for analyzing genetic case/control association data in which cases can be further classified into subtypes, for example, based on clinical features. The primary utility of our work is the ability to distinguish between subtype-specific and modifier effects of genetic variants within a single testing framework. Methods: A range of disease/subtype causal models are defined for genetic variants involving subtype-specific and modifier effects. We present a log-linear modeling framework enabling comparison between these causal models and selection of the best-fit model. Results: We evaluate and compare the analytic power and model selection performance of the proposed work with standard two-group-based association tests. Simulation studies demonstrate that our approach has similar or greater power than the traditional approach over a range of causal models. We also report empirical findings about the impact of misspecification of subtype frequency during model selection, and extend the application of the proposed work to the cross-disorder association studies of multiple diseases. Conclusion: Whether a variant is a disease risk factor, is subtype specific, or modifies disease features has important consequences for the interpretation and follow-up of genetic associations. Our framework provides a simple, systematic way to evaluate and describe associations involving such subtype-specific or modifier effects. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available