Cited by 490Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyForensic and Genetic ResearchGenetic diversity and population structure

Control of confounding of genetic associations in stratified populations

Open access
Hoggart, Clive J., Parra, Esteban J., Shriver, Mark D., Bonilla, Carolina, Kittles, Rick A., Clayton, David G., McKeigue, Paul M.·2003·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

To control for hidden population stratification in genetic-association studies, statistical methods that use marker genotype data to infer population structure have been proposed as a possible alternative to family-based designs. In principle, it is possible to infer population structure from associations between marker loci and from associations of markers with the trait, even when no information about the demographic background of the population is available. In a model in which the total population is formed by admixture between two or more subpopulations, confounding can be estimated and controlled. Current implementations of this approach have limitations, the most serious of which is that they do not allow for uncertainty in estimations of individual admixture proportions or for lack of identifiability of subpopulations in the model. We describe methods that overcome these limitations by a combination of Bayesian and classical approaches, and we demonstrate the methods by using data from three admixed populations--African American, African Caribbean, and Hispanic American--in which there is extreme confounding of trait-genotype associations because the trait under study (skin pigmentation) varies with admixture proportions. In these data sets, as many as one-third of marker loci show crude associations with the trait. Control for confounding by population stratification eliminates these associations, except at loci that are linked to candidate genes for the trait. With only 32 markers informative for ancestry, the efficiency of the analysis is 70%. These methods can deal with both confounding and selection bias in genetic-association studies, making family-based designs unnecessary.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/375613

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • Several candidate-gene admixture studies on African Americans and African Caribbeans have shown that the same three nonsynonymous polymorphisms found in the South Asian cohort-rs1042602 in TYR, rs16891982 in SLC45A2, and rs1426654 in SLC24A5-are significantly associated with melanin content measured by reflectometry.

    “During the past few years, several candidate-gene admixture studies on a cohort of African Americans and African Caribbeans has shown that the same three nonsynonymous polymorphisms that we found in our South Asian cohort-rs1042602 in TYR, rs16891982 in SLC45A2, and rs1426654 in SLC24A5-are significantly associated with melanin content measured by reflectometry.13,21,22,24”
  • The TYR SNP rs1042602 is highly polymorphic in all European populations, but previous studies found that this SNP was not significantly associated with skin-reflectance measurements in a white population.

    “In comparison, the TYR SNP rs1042602 is highly polymorphic in all European populations, but, despite its variability, previous studies found that this SNP was not significantly associated with skin-reflectance measurements in a white population.13,21,24,29”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoggart, C. J., Parra, E. J., Shriver, M. D., Bonilla, C., Kittles, R. A., Clayton, D. G., & McKeigue, P. M.
Affiliations
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Howard University (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Hoggart, Clive J.
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-06
Volume
72
Issue
6
Pages
1492-1504
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2108214367
Cited by
490
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 37
FWCI
21.39
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)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh060343-03)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 60343)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG002154, HG-02154)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK53958, R01DK053958)
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 diversity and population structure
Keywords
population stratification, confounding, genetic association studies, admixture, ancestry inference, skin pigmentation, selection bias, African Americans, African Caribbeans, ancestry informative markers, Bayesian analysis
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Black or African American, Female, Genetic Markers, Genetics, Population, Genotype, Humans, Male, Markov Chains, Models, Genetic, Monte Carlo Method, Polymorphism, Genetic, Skin Pigmentation, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Case-Control Studies, Quantitative Trait, Heritable, Black People, White People

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