Skip Navigation


Human Molecular Genetics Advance Access originally published online on July 31, 2007
Human Molecular Genetics 2007 16(20):2494-2505; doi:10.1093/hmg/ddm205
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/20/2494    most recent
ddm205v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nannya, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Ogawa, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nannya, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Ogawa, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Evaluation of genome-wide power of genetic association studies based on empirical data from the HapMap project

Yasuhito Nannya1,2,4, Kenjiro Taura3, Mineo Kurokawa1, Shigeru Chiba2 and Seishi Ogawa2,4,*

1 Department of Hematology/Oncology, 2 Department of Cell Therapy and Transplantation Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine and 3 Department of Information and Communication Engineering, Graduate School of Information Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan and 4 Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Saitama 332-0012, Japan

* To whom correspondence should be addressed to: Department of Cell Therapy and Transplantation Medicine, The 21st Century COE Program, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan. Tel: +81 358008741; Fax: +81 358046261; Email: sogawa-tky{at}umin.ac.jp

Received April 7, 2007; Accepted July 22, 2007

With recent advances in high-throughput single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) typing technologies, genome-wide association studies have become a realistic approach to identify the causative genes that are responsible for common diseases of complex genetic traits. In this strategy, a trade-off between the increased genome coverage and a chance of finding SNPs incidentally showing a large statistics becomes serious due to extreme multiple-hypothesis testing. We investigated the extent to which this trade-off limits the genome-wide power with this approach by simulating a large number of case-control panels based on the empirical data from the HapMap Project. In our simulations, statistical costs of multiple hypothesis testing were evaluated by empirically calculating distributions of the maximum value of the {chi}2 statistics for a series of marker sets having increasing numbers of SNPs, which were used to determine a genome-wide threshold in the following power simulations. With a practical study size, the cost of multiple testing largely offsets the potential benefits from increased genome coverage given modest genetic effects and/or low frequencies of causal alleles. In most realistic scenarios, increasing genome coverage becomes less influential on the power, while sample size is the predominant determinant of the feasibility of genome-wide association tests. Increasing genome coverage without corresponding increase in sample size will only consume resources without little gain in power. For common causal alleles with relatively large effect sizes [genotype relative risk ≥1.7], we can expect satisfactory power with currently available large-scale genotyping platforms using realistic sample size (~1000 per arm).


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.