4.6 Article

Correction of Population Stratification in Large Multi-Ethnic Association Studies

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001382

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [Clinician-Scientist Award, Investigator Award]
  2. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
  3. International Clinical Epidemiology Network
  4. Genome Canada
  5. Genome Quebec
  6. Burroughs Wellcome Fund [Clinician-Scientist Award]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The vast majority of genetic risk factors for complex diseases have, taken individually, a small effect on the end phenotype. Population-based association studies therefore need very large sample sizes to detect significant differences between affected and non-affected individuals. Including thousands of affected individuals in a study requires recruitment in numerous centers, possibly from different geographic regions. Unfortunately such a recruitment strategy is likely to complicate the study design and to generate concerns regarding population stratification. Methodology/Principal Findings. We analyzed 9,751 individuals representing three main ethnic groups - Europeans, Arabs and South Asians - that had been enrolled from 154 centers involving 52 countries for a global case/control study of acute myocardial infarction. All individuals were genotyped at 103 candidate genes using 1,536 SNPs selected with a tagging strategy that captures most of the genetic diversity in different populations. We show that relying solely on self-reported ethnicity is not sufficient to exclude population stratification and we present additional methods to identify and correct for stratification. Conclusions/Significance. Our results highlight the importance of carefully addressing population stratification and of carefully cleaning'' the sample prior to analyses to obtain stronger signals of association and to avoid spurious results.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available