Cited by 44Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyForensic and Genetic ResearchGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Using Principal Components of Genetic Variation for Robust and Powerful Detection of Gene-Gene Interactions in Case-Control and Case-Only Studies

Open access
Bhattacharjee, Samsiddhi, Wang, Zhaoming, Ciampa, Julia, Kraft, Peter, Chanock, Stephen, Yu, Kai, Chatterjee, Nilanjan·2010·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

Many popular methods for exploring gene-gene interactions, including the case-only approach, rely on the key assumption that physically distant loci are in linkage equilibrium in the underlying population. These methods utilize the presence of correlation between unlinked loci in a disease-enriched sample as evidence of interactions among the loci in the etiology of the disease. We use data from the CGEMS case-control genome-wide association study of breast cancer to demonstrate empirically that the case-only and related methods have the potential to create large-scale false positives because of the presence of population stratification (PS) that creates long-range linkage disequilibrium in the genome. We show that the bias can be removed by considering parametric and nonparametric methods that assume gene-gene independence between unlinked loci, not in the entire population, but only conditional on population substructure that can be uncovered based on the principal components of a suitably large panel of PS markers. Applications in the CGEMS study as well as simulated data show that the proposed methods are robust to the presence of population stratification and are yet much more powerful, relative to standard logistic regression methods that are also commonly used as robust alternatives to the case-only type methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.01.026

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • GWAS are generally not powered to detect epistasis or GxE and are not designed to detect epigenetic influences.

    “Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are not generally powered to detect epistasis or G×E121, and they are not designed to detect epigenetic influences122”

    From Rare and common variants: twenty arguments (2012) · cites this paper as [121]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bhattacharjee, S., Wang, Z., Ciampa, J., Kraft, P., Chanock, S., Yu, K., & Chatterjee, N.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Chatterjee, Nilanjan
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
86
Issue
3
Pages
331-342
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1963989728
Cited by
44
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (P01CA087969, [P01 CA87969)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
gene-gene interaction, epistasis, case-only design, case-control study, population stratification, linkage disequilibrium, principal components, population substructure, breast cancer, false positives, genetic association
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Epistasis, Genetic, Female, Humans, Models, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Linkage Disequilibrium, Bias, Logistic Models, Case-Control Studies, Databases, Factual, Statistics, Nonparametric, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Principal Component Analysis, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review