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
. 2014 Jun 14:7:9.
doi: 10.1186/1756-0381-7-9. eCollection 2014.

An adaptive permutation approach for genome-wide association study: evaluation and recommendations for use

Affiliations

An adaptive permutation approach for genome-wide association study: evaluation and recommendations for use

Ronglin Che et al. BioData Min. .

Abstract

Background: Permutation testing is a robust and popular approach for significance testing in genomic research, which has the broad advantage of estimating significance non-parametrically, thereby safe guarding against inflated type I error rates. However, the computational efficiency remains a challenging issue that limits its wide application, particularly in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Because of this, adaptive permutation strategies can be employed to make permutation approaches feasible. While these approaches have been used in practice, there is little research into the statistical properties of these approaches, and little guidance into the proper application of such a strategy for accurate p-value estimation at the GWAS level.

Methods: In this work, we advocate an adaptive permutation procedure that is statistically valid as well as computationally feasible in GWAS. We perform extensive simulation experiments to evaluate the robustness of the approach to violations of modeling assumptions and compare the power of the adaptive approach versus standard approaches. We also evaluate the parameter choices in implementing the adaptive permutation approach to provide guidance on proper implementation in real studies. Additionally, we provide an example of the application of adaptive permutation testing on real data.

Results: The results provide sufficient evidence that the adaptive test is robust to violations of modeling assumptions. In addition, even when modeling assumptions are correct, the power achieved by adaptive permutation is identical to the parametric approach over a range of significance thresholds and effect sizes under the alternative. A framework for proper implementation of the adaptive procedure is also generated.

Conclusions: While the adaptive permutation approach presented here is not novel, the current study provides evidence of the validity of the approach, and importantly provides guidance on the proper implementation of such a strategy. Additionally, tools are made available to aid investigators in implementing these approaches.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Quantile-quantile plots for ANOVA, standard and adaptive permutation under the normal and the Student's t -distribution (df = 5) null model, with 10,000 replications and 9,900 permutations.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Quartile-quartile plots and comparison for ANOVA and adaptive permutation under the Student's t-distribution (df = 5) null model, with 1,000,000 replications and 1,999,999,900 permutations.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Computation time comparison of standard and adaptive permutation for varying effect size, with 1,000 replications and 9,900 permutations.

References

    1. Besag J, Clifford P. Sequential Monte-Carlo p-values. Biometrika. 1991;78(2):301–304. doi: 10.1093/biomet/78.2.301. - DOI
    1. Boos DD, Zhang J. Monte Carlo evaluation of resampling-based hypothesis tests. J Am Stat Assoc. 2000;95(450):486–492. doi: 10.1080/01621459.2000.10474226. - DOI
    1. Phipson B, Smyth GK. Permutation p-values should never be zero: calculating exact p-values when permutations are randomly drawn. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 2010;9:Article39. - PubMed
    1. Churchill GA, Doerge RW. Empirical threshold values for quantitative trait mapping. Genetics. 1994;138(3):963–971. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cantor RM, Lange K, Sinsheimer JS. Prioritizing GWAS results: a review of statistical methods and recommendations for their application. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86(1):6–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.11.017. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources