Comparing Haplotype and Locus-Based Methods for Disease Mapping
Author Information
Author(s): Keith Humphreys, Mark M Iles, Joan E Bailey-Wilson, Laura Almasy, Mariza de Andrade, Julia Bailey, Heike Bickeböller, Heather J Cordell, E Warwick Daw, Lynn Goldin, Ellen L Goode, Courtney Gray-McGuire, Wayne Hening, Gail Jarvik, Brion S Maher, Nancy Mendell, Andrew D Paterson, John Rice, Glen Satten, Brian Suarez, Veronica Vieland, Marsha Wilcox, Heping Zhang, Andreas Ziegler, Jean W MacCluer
Primary Institution: Karolinska Institutet
Hypothesis
Can haplotype-based methods outperform locus-based methods in fine-scale mapping of disease susceptibility loci?
Conclusion
Haplotype-based methods do not significantly outperform locus-based methods in detecting disease associations in the studied datasets.
Supporting Evidence
- Both haplotype-based and locus-based methods were tested for their effectiveness in mapping disease susceptibility.
- Four datasets were created to ensure sufficient power for the analysis.
- Results showed that haplotype-sharing methods did not outperform the best locus-scoring methods.
- Interactions were detected using the single-locus scoring method but not by haplotype-sharing methods.
- The study highlighted the importance of understanding the LD structure in the regions studied.
Takeaway
The study looked at two ways to find genes that might cause diseases and found that both methods work similarly.
Methodology
The study compared several haplotype-based and locus-based methods using simulated datasets of cases and controls.
Limitations
The results may not generalize to real-world problems as the data did not model shared ancestry among haplotypes.
Participant Demographics
500 cases and 250 controls from the Danacaa population.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.05
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website