Upward bias in odds ratio estimates from genome-wide association studies
- PMID: 17266119
- DOI: 10.1002/gepi.20209
Upward bias in odds ratio estimates from genome-wide association studies
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies are carried out to identify unknown genes for a complex trait. Polymorphisms showing the most statistically significant associations are reported and followed up in subsequent confirmatory studies. In addition to the test of association, the statistical analysis provides point estimates of the relationship between the genotype and phenotype at each polymorphism, typically an odds ratio in case-control association studies. The statistical significance of the test and the estimator of the odds ratio are completely correlated. Selecting the most extreme statistics is equivalent to selecting the most extreme odds ratios. The value of the estimator, given the value of the statistical significance depends on the standard error of the estimator and the power of the study. This report shows that when power is low, estimates of the odds ratio from a genome-wide association study, or any large-scale association study, will be upwardly biased. Genome-wide association studies are often underpowered given the low alpha levels required to declare statistical significance and the small individual genetic effects known to characterize complex traits. Factors such as low allele frequency, inadequate sample size and weak genetic effects contribute to large standard errors in the odds ratio estimates, low power and upwardly biased odds ratios. Studies that have high power to detect an association with the true odds ratio will have little or no bias, regardless of the statistical significance threshold. The results have implications for the interpretation of genome-wide association analysis and the planning of subsequent confirmatory stages.
(c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Similar articles
-
Meta-analysis of genetic association studies: methodologies, between-study heterogeneity and winner's curse.J Hum Genet. 2009 Nov;54(11):615-23. doi: 10.1038/jhg.2009.95. Epub 2009 Oct 23. J Hum Genet. 2009. PMID: 19851339 Review.
-
The power of genome-wide association studies of complex disease genes: statistical limitations of indirect approaches using SNP markers.J Hum Genet. 2001;46(8):478-82. doi: 10.1007/s100380170048. J Hum Genet. 2001. PMID: 11501946
-
Evaluation of genome-wide power of genetic association studies based on empirical data from the HapMap project.Hum Mol Genet. 2007 Oct 15;16(20):2494-505. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddm205. Epub 2007 Jul 31. Hum Mol Genet. 2007. PMID: 17666406
-
Detailed analysis of the relative power of direct and indirect association studies and the implications for their interpretation.Hum Hered. 2007;64(1):63-73. doi: 10.1159/000101424. Epub 2007 Apr 27. Hum Hered. 2007. PMID: 17483598
-
The pursuit of genome-wide association studies: where are we now?J Hum Genet. 2010 Apr;55(4):195-206. doi: 10.1038/jhg.2010.19. Epub 2010 Mar 19. J Hum Genet. 2010. PMID: 20300123 Review.
Cited by
-
Genome-wide association studies of cancer.J Clin Oncol. 2010 Sep 20;28(27):4255-67. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.7816. Epub 2010 Jun 28. J Clin Oncol. 2010. PMID: 20585100 Free PMC article.
-
Combining controls can improve power in two-stage association studies.BMC Genet. 2018 Oct 3;19(1):89. doi: 10.1186/s12863-018-0675-y. BMC Genet. 2018. PMID: 30285617 Free PMC article.
-
What can genome-wide association studies tell us about the genetics of common disease?PLoS Genet. 2008 Feb;4(2):e33. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.0040033. PLoS Genet. 2008. PMID: 18454206 Free PMC article.
-
Ranking bias in association studies.Hum Hered. 2009;67(4):267-75. doi: 10.1159/000194979. Epub 2009 Jan 27. Hum Hered. 2009. PMID: 19172085 Free PMC article.
-
Quantifying and correcting for the winner's curse in genetic association studies.Genet Epidemiol. 2009 Jul;33(5):453-62. doi: 10.1002/gepi.20398. Genet Epidemiol. 2009. PMID: 19140131 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources