Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 Mar;22(3):402-8.
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2013.161. Epub 2013 Jul 24.

A systematic review of cancer GWAS and candidate gene meta-analyses reveals limited overlap but similar effect sizes

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A systematic review of cancer GWAS and candidate gene meta-analyses reveals limited overlap but similar effect sizes

Christine Q Chang et al. Eur J Hum Genet. 2014 Mar.

Abstract

Candidate gene and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) represent two complementary approaches to uncovering genetic contributions to common diseases. We systematically reviewed the contributions of these approaches to our knowledge of genetic associations with cancer risk by analyzing the data in the Cancer Genome-wide Association and Meta Analyses database (Cancer GAMAdb). The database catalogs studies published since January 1, 2000, by study and cancer type. In all, we found that meta-analyses and pooled analyses of candidate genes reported 349 statistically significant associations and GWAS reported 269, for a total of 577 unique associations. Only 41 (7.1%) associations were reported in both candidate gene meta-analyses and GWAS, usually with similar effect sizes. When considering only noteworthy associations (defined as those with false-positive report probabilities≤0.2) and accounting for indirect overlap, we found 202 associations, with 27 of those appearing in both meta-analyses and GWAS. Our findings suggest that meta-analyses of well-conducted candidate gene studies may continue to add to our understanding of the genetic associations in the post-GWAS era.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Methodology used for inclusion of associations into the analyses.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Odds ratios of variants common to candidate gene meta-analyses or pooled analyses (MA) and GWAS excluding ALDH2 in esophageal cancer (meta-analysis OR=2.52, GWAS OR=3.48).

References

    1. Cordell HJ, Clayton DG. A unified stepwise regression procedure for evaluating the relative effects of polymorphisms within a gene using case/control or family data: application to HLA in type 1 diabetes. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;70:124–141. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tabor HK, Risch NJ, Myers RM. Candidate-gene approaches for studying complex genetic traits: practical considerations. Nat Rev Genet. 2002;3:391–397. - PubMed
    1. Ioannidis JP, Gwinn M, Little J, et al. A road map for efficient and reliable human genome epidemiology. Nat Genet. 2006;38:3–5. - PubMed
    1. Hindorff LA, Gillanders EM, Manolio TA. Genetic architecture of cancer and other complex diseases: lessons learned and future directions. Carcinogenesis. 2011;32:945–954. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hardy J, Singleton A. Genomewide association studies and human disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1759–1768. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources