ASSOCIATON TESTS THAT ACCOMMODATE GENOTYPING ERRORS

High-throughput SNP arrays provide estimates of genotypes for up to one million loci, often used in genome-wide association studies. While these estimates are typically very accurate, genotyping errors do occur, which can influence in particular the most extreme test statistics and p-values. Estimates for the genotype uncertainties are also available, although typically ignored. In this manuscript, we develop a framework to incorporate these genotype uncertainties in case-control studies for any genetic model. We verify that using the assumption of a “local alternative” in the score test is very reasonable for effect sizes typically seen in SNP association studies, and show that the power of the score test is simply a function of the correlation of the genotype probabilities with the true genotypes. We demonstrate that the power to detect a true association can be substantially increased for difficult to call genotypes, resulting in improved inference in association studies.

Power and Robustness of Linkage Tests for Quantitative Traits in General Pedigrees

There are numerous statistical methods for quantitative trait linkage analysis in human studies. An ideal such method would have high power to detect genetic loci contributing to the trait, would be robust to non-normality in the phenotype distribution, would be appropriate for general pedigrees, would allow the incorporation of environmental covariates, and would be appropriate in the presence of selective sampling. We recently described a general framework for quantitative trait linkage analysis, based on generalized estimating equations, for which many current methods are special cases. This procedure is appropriate for general pedigrees and easily accommodates environmental covariates. In this paper, we use computer simulations to investigate the power robustness of a variety of linkage test statistics built upon our general framework. We also propose two novel test statistics that take account of higher moments of the phenotype distribution, in order to accommodate non-normality. These new linkage tests are shown to have high power and to be robust to non-normality. While we have not yet examined the performance of our procedures in the context of selective sampling via computer simulations, the proposed tests satisfy all of the other qualities of an ideal quantitative trait linkage analysis method.

Quantifying and Comparing the Accuracy of Binary Biomarkers When Predicting a Failure Time Outcome

The positive and negative predictive value are standard measures used to quantify the predictive accuracy of binary biomarkers when the outcome being predicted is also binary. When the biomarkers are instead being used to predict a failure time outcome, there is no standard way of quantifying predictive accuracy. We propose a natural extension of the traditional predictive values to accommodate censored survival data. We discuss not only quantifying predictive accuracy using these extended predictive values, but also rigorously comparing the accuracy of two biomarkers in terms of their predictive values. Using a marginal regression framework, we describe how to estimate differences in predictive accuracy and how to test whether the observed difference is statistically significant.

Marginal Structural Models for Partial Exposure Regimes

Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are ell known to be highly susceptible for nosocomial (i.e. hospital-acquired) infections due to their poor health and many invasive therapeutic treatments. The effects of acquiring such infections in ICU on mortality are however ill understood. Our goal is to quantify these effects using data from the National Surveillance Study of Nosocomial Infections in Intensive Care Units (Belgium). This is a challenging problem because of the presence of time-dependent confounders (such as exposure to mechanical ventilation)which lie on the causal path from infection to mortality. Standard statistical analyses may be severely misleading in such settings and have shown contradicting results. While inverse probability weighting for marginal structural models can be used to accommodate time-dependent confounders, inference for the effect of ?ICU acquired infections on mortality under such models is further complicated (a) by the fact that marginal structural models infer the effect of acquiring infection on a given, fixed day ?in ICU?, which is not well defined when ICU discharge comes prior to that day; (b) by informative censoring of the survival time due to hospital discharge; and (c) by the instability of the inverse weighting estimation procedure. We accommodate these problems by developing inference under a new class of marginal structural models which describe the hazard of death for patients if, possibly contrary to fact, they stayed in the ICU for at least a given number of days s and acquired infection or not on that day. Using these models we estimate that, if patients stayed in the ICU for at least s days, the effect of acquiring infection on day s would be to multiply the subsequent hazard of death by 2.74 (95 per cent conservative CI 1.48; 5.09).