Three Ways of Combining Genotyping and Resequencing in Case-Control Association Studies

We describe three statistical results that we have found to be useful in case-control genetic association testing. All three involve combining the discovery of novel genetic variants, usually by sequencing, with genotyping methods that recognize previously discovered variants. We first consider expanding the list of known variants by concentrating variant-discovery in cases. Although the naive inclusion of cases-only sequencing data would create a bias, we show that some sequencing data may be retained, even if controls are not sequenced. Furthermore, for alleles of intermediate frequency, cases-only sequencing with bias-correction entails little if any loss of power, compared to dividing the same sequencing effort among cases and controls. Secondly, we investigate more strongly focused variant discovery to obtain a greater enrichment for disease-related variants. We show how case status, family history, and marker sharing enrich the discovery set by increments that are multiplicative with penetrance, enabling the preferential discovery of high-penetrance variants. A third result applies when sequencing is the primary means of counting alleles in both cases and controls, but a supplementary pooled genotyping sample is used to identify the variants that are very rare. We show that this raises no validity issues, and we evaluate a less expensive and more adaptive approach to judging rarity, based on group-specific variants. We demonstrate the important and unusual caveat that this method requires equal sample sizes for validity. These three results can be used to more efficiently detect the association of rare genetic variants with disease

A unified framework for multi-locus association analysis of both common and rare variants

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Common, complex diseases are hypothesized to result from a combination of common and rare genetic variants. We developed a unified framework for the joint association testing of both types of variants. Within the framework, we developed a union-intersection test suitable for genome-wide analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), candidate gene data, as well as medical sequencing data. The union-intersection test is a composite test of association of genotype frequencies and differential correlation among markers.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We demonstrated by computer simulation that the false positive error rate was controlled at the expected level. We also demonstrated scenarios in which the multi-locus test was more powerful than traditional single marker analysis. To illustrate use of the union-intersection test with real data, we analyzed a publically available data set of 319,813 autosomal SNPs genotyped for 938 cases of Parkinson disease and 863 neurologically normal controls for which no genome-wide significant results were found by traditional single marker analysis. We also analyzed an independent follow-up sample of 183 cases and 248 controls for replication.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We identified a single risk haplotype with a directionally consistent effect in both samples in the gene <it>GAK</it>, which is involved in clathrin-mediated membrane trafficking. We also found suggestive evidence that directionally inconsistent marginal effects from single marker analysis appeared to result from risk being driven by different haplotypes in the two samples for the genes <it>SYN3 </it>and <it>NGLY1</it>, which are involved in neurotransmitter release and proteasomal degradation, respectively. These results illustrate the utility of our unified framework for genome-wide association analysis of common, complex diseases.</p

Haplotype tagging for the identification of common disease genes

Genome-wide linkage disequilibrium (LD) mapping of common disease genes could be more powerful than linkage analysis if the appropriate density of polymorphic markers were known and if the genotyping effort and cost of producing such an LD map could be reduced. Although different metrics that measure the extent of LD have been evaluated1, 2, 3, even the most recent studies2, 4 have not placed significant emphasis on the most informative and cost-effective method of LD mapping—that based on haplotypes. We have scanned 135 kb of DNA from nine genes, genotyped 122 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; approximately 184,000 genotypes) and determined the common haplotypes in a minimum of 384 European individuals for each gene. Here we show how knowledge of the common haplotypes and the SNPs that tag them can be used to (i) explain the often complex patterns of LD between adjacent markers, (ii) reduce genotyping significantly (in this case from 122 to 34 SNPs), (iii) scan the common variation of a gene sensitively and comprehensively and (iv) provide key fine-mapping data within regions of strong LD. Our results also indicate that, at least for the genes studied here, the current version of dbSNP would have been of limited utility for LD mapping because many common haplotypes could not be defined. A directed re-sequencing effort of the approximately 10% of the genome in or near genes in the major ethnic groups would aid the systematic evaluation of the common variant model of common disease