Including Additional Controls from Public Databases Improves the Power of a Genome-Wide Association StudyMukherjee S.a, b · Simon J.c · Bayuga S.c · Ludwig E.d · Yoo S.c · Orlow I.c · Viale A.e · Offit K.b, d · Kurtz R.C.d · Olson S.H.c · Klein R.J.b
aGerstner Sloan-Kettering Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, bProgram in Cancer Biology and Genetics, cDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, dDepartment of Medicine, and eGenomics Core Laboratory, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, N.Y., USA
Robert J. Klein
Program in Cancer Biology and Genetics
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
1275 York Ave., Box 337, New York, NY 10065 (USA)
Tel. +1 646 888 2525, E-Mail firstname.lastname@example.org
Do you have an account?
Though genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous susceptibility loci for common diseases, their use is limited due to the expense of genotyping large cohorts of individuals. One potential solution is to use ‘additional controls’, or genotype data from control individuals deposited in public repositories. While this approach has been used by several groups, the genetically heterogeneous nature of the population of the United States makes this approach potentially problematic. We empirically investigated the utility of this approach in a US-based GWAS. In a small GWAS of pancreatic cancer in New York, we observed clear population structure differences relative to controls from the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP). When we conduct the GWAS using these additional controls, we find large inflation of the test statistic that is properly corrected by using eigenvectors from principal components analysis as covariates. To deal with errors introduced due to different sources, we propose simultaneously genotyping a small number of controls along with cases and then comparing this group to the additional controls. We show that removing SNPs that show differences between these control groups reduces false-positive findings. Thus, through an empirical approach, this report provides practical guidance for using additional controls from publicly available datasets.
© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.