Cited by 1,042Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Rare-Variant Association Analysis: Study Designs and Statistical Tests

Open access
Lee, Seunggeun, Abecasis, Gonçalo R., Boehnke, Michael, Lin, Xihong·2014·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

Despite the extensive discovery of trait- and disease-associated common variants, much of the genetic contribution to complex traits remains unexplained. Rare variants can explain additional disease risk or trait variability. An increasing number of studies are underway to identify trait- and disease-associated rare variants. In this review, we provide an overview of statistical issues in rare-variant association studies with a focus on study designs and statistical tests. We present the design and analysis pipeline of rare-variant studies and review cost-effective sequencing designs and genotyping platforms. We compare various gene- or region-based association tests, including burden tests, variance-component tests, and combined omnibus tests, in terms of their assumptions and performance. Also discussed are the related topics of meta-analysis, population-stratification adjustment, genotype imputation, follow-up studies, and heritability due to rare variants. We provide guidelines for analysis and discuss some of the challenges inherent in these studies and future research directions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.06.009

Cites

152 of 152 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?

  • The most natural grouping for rare variants is within a gene, based on predicted functional consequence or evidence for deleteriousness.

    “The most natural grouping for rare variants is within a gene, based on predicted functional consequence or evidence for deleteriousness 13,14 .”
  • URV analysis has had limited success in individual gene discovery for schizophrenia due to power limitations, with only SETD1A robustly associated.

    “However, the analysis of URVs has had limited success in delivering individual gene discovery in schizophrenia because of power limitations, with only a single gene, SETD1A, identified as robustly associated16,21.”
  • The most natural grouping for rare variants is within a gene based on predicted functional consequence or deleteriousness.

    “The most natural grouping for rare variants is within a gene, based on predicted functional consequence or evidence for deleteriousness16,17.”
  • Natural selection tends to keep large-effect risk variants at lower frequencies, especially in disorders with reduced fecundity such as schizophrenia.

    “Theory predicts that the forces of natural selection will tend to keep large effect risk variants at much lower frequencies in the population, especially in disorders such as schizophrenia that are associated with reduced fecundity16.”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, S., Abecasis, G. R., Boehnke, M., & Lin, X.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Xihong
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-07
Volume
95
Issue
1
Pages
5-23
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2063655230
Cited by
1,042
References
152
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 82 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 95 · 2019: 75 · 2018: 109 · 2017: 103 · 2016: 105 · 2015: 67 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 1
FWCI
12.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R00HL113164, R01HL117626)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (HG 007022, R56HG000376, HG006513, R01HG000376, U01HG006513, R01HG007022, HG000376)
  • National Cancer Institute (R37CA076404, P01CA134294, R35CA197449)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK020572)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P42ES016454, P30ES000002)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
rare variants, research design, burden test, genotyping platforms, meta-analysis, population stratification, genotype imputation, follow-up study, heritability, complex traits, disease risk
MeSH terms
Genotype, Humans, 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