首页> 外文OA文献 >Linkage Analysis in the Presence of Errors IV: Joint Pseudomarker Analysis of Linkage and/or Linkage Disequilibrium on a Mixture of Pedigrees and Singletons When the Mode of Inheritance Cannot Be Accurately Specified
【2h】

Linkage Analysis in the Presence of Errors IV: Joint Pseudomarker Analysis of Linkage and/or Linkage Disequilibrium on a Mixture of Pedigrees and Singletons When the Mode of Inheritance Cannot Be Accurately Specified

机译:存在错误时的链接分析IV:无法准确指定继承方式的谱系和单例混合物上的链接和/或链接不平衡的联合伪标记分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

There is a lot of confusion in the literature about the “differences” between “model-based” and “model-free” methods and about which approach is better suited for detection of the genes predisposing to complex multifactorial phenotypes. By starting from first principles, we demonstrate that the differences between the two approaches have more to do with study design than statistical analysis. When simple data structures are repeatedly ascertained, no assumptions about the genotype-phenotype relationship need to be made for the analysis to be powerful, since simple data structures admit only a small number of df. When more complicated and/or heterogeneous data structures are ascertained, however, the number of df in the underlying probability model is too large to have a powerful, truly “model-free” test. So-called “model-free” methods typically simplify the underlying probability model by implicitly assuming that, in some sense, all meioses connecting two affected individuals are informative for linkage with identical probability and that the affected individuals in a pedigree share as many disease-predisposing alleles as possible. By contrast, “model-based” methods add structure to the underlying parameter space by making assumptions about the genotype-phenotype relationship, making it possible to probabilistically assign disease-locus genotypes to all individuals in the data set on the basis of the observed phenotypes. In this study, we demonstrate the equivalence of these two approaches in a variety of situations and exploit this equivalence to develop more powerful and efficient likelihood-based analogues of “model-free” tests of linkage and/or linkage disequilibrium. Through the use of a “pseudomarker” locus to structure the space of observations, sib-pairs, triads, and singletons can be analyzed jointly, which will lead to tests that are more well-behaved, efficient, and powerful than traditional “model-free” tests such as the affected sib-pair, transmission/disequilibrium, haplotype relative risk, and case-control tests. Also described is an extension of this approach to large pedigrees, which, in practice, is equivalent to affected relative-pair analysis. The proposed methods are equally applicable to two-point and multipoint analysis (using complex-valued recombination fractions).
机译:关于“基于模型的”方法与“无模型的”方法之间的“差异”,以及哪种方法更适合于检测具有复杂多因素表型的基因,文献上存在很多困惑。从第一原理开始,我们证明了这两种方法之间的差异更多地与研究设计有关,而与统计分析无关。当反复确定简单的数据结构时,由于简单数据结构仅允许少量的df,因此无需对基因型与表型的关系做任何假设即可使分析强大。但是,当确定更复杂和/或异构的数据结构时,基础概率模型中的df数量太大,无法进行强大的,真正的“无模型”测试。所谓的“无模型”方法通常会通过隐式假设在某种意义上假设连接两个受影响个体的所有介词都具有相同概率联动的信息,并且家谱中的受影响个体与疾病共享的数量一样多,从而简化了潜在的概率模型。倾向于等位基因。相比之下,“基于模型”的方法通过假设基因型与表型之间的关系为基础的参数空间添加结构,从而有可能根据观察到的表型将疾病所在地基因型概率分配给数据集中的所有个体。在这项研究中,我们证明了这两种方法在各种情况下的等效性,并利用这种等效性来开发更强大和有效的基于似然性的连锁和/或连锁不平衡“无模型”测试类似物。通过使用“伪标记”基因座来构建观测空间,可以对同胞对,三合会和单身人士进行联合分析,这将使测试比传统的“模型-测试”行为更完善,更有效且更强大。免费”测试,例如受影响的同胞对,传播/不平衡,单倍型相对风险和病例对照测试。还描述了此方法对大血统的扩展,在实践中,这等效于受影响的相对对分析。所提出的方法同样适用于两点和多点分析(使用复数值重组分数)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号