Quality control and conduct of genome-wide association meta-analyses.

Rigorous organization and quality control (QC) are necessary to facilitate successful genome-wide association meta-analyses (GWAMAs) of statistics aggregated across multiple genome-wide association studies. This protocol provides guidelines for (i) organizational aspects of GWAMAs, and for (ii) QC at the study file level, the meta-level across studies and the meta-analysis output level. Real-world examples highlight issues experienced and solutions developed by the GIANT Consortium that has conducted meta-analyses including data from 125 studies comprising more than 330,000 individuals. We provide a general protocol for conducting GWAMAs and carrying out QC to minimize errors and to guarantee maximum use of the data. We also include details for the use of a powerful and flexible software package called EasyQC. Precise timings will be greatly influenced by consortium size. For consortia of comparable size to the GIANT Consortium, this protocol takes a minimum of about 10 months to complete.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Switzerland: a comprehensive quality control report on centre effect.

Interest groups advocate centre-specific outcome data as a useful tool for patients in choosing a hospital for their treatment and for decision-making by politicians and the insurance industry. Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) requires significant infrastructure and represents a cost-intensive procedure. It therefore qualifies as a prime target for such a policy. We made use of the comprehensive database of the Swiss Blood Stem Cells Transplant Group (SBST) to evaluate potential use of mortality rates. Nine institutions reported a total of 4717 HSCT - 1427 allogeneic (30.3%), 3290 autologous (69.7%) - in 3808 patients between the years 1997 and 2008. Data were analysed for survival- and transplantation-related mortality (TRM) at day 100 and at 5 years. The data showed marked and significant differences between centres in unadjusted analyses. These differences were absent or marginal when the results were adjusted for disease, year of transplant and the EBMT risk score (a score incorporating patient age, disease stage, time interval between diagnosis and transplantation, and, for allogeneic transplants, donor type and donor-recipient gender combination) in a multivariable analysis. These data indicate comparable quality among centres in Switzerland. They show that comparison of crude centre-specific outcome data without adjustment for the patient mix may be misleading. Mandatory data collection and systematic review of all cases within a comprehensive quality management system might, in contrast, serve as a model to ascertain the quality of other cost-intensive therapies in Switzerland.