How to deal with the early GWAS data when imputing and combining different 
arrays is necessary

Uh, H. W.; Deelen, J.; Beekman, M.; Helmer, Q.; Rivadeneira, F.; Hottenga, J. J.; Boomsma, D. I.; Hofman, A.; Uitterlinden, A. G.; Slagboom, P. E.; Bohringer, S.; Houwing-Duistermaat, J. J.

doi:10.1038/ejhg.2011.231

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

How to deal with the early GWAS data when imputing and combining different arrays is necessary

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons276058

Deelen, J.
Deelen – Genetics and Biomarkers of Human Ageing, Research Groups, Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22189269
(Any fulltext)

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Uh, H. W., Deelen, J., Beekman, M., Helmer, Q., Rivadeneira, F., Hottenga, J. J., et al. (2011). How to deal with the early GWAS data when imputing and combining different arrays is necessary. Eur J Hum Genet, 20(5), 572-6. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2011.231.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000B-6C15-5

Abstract

Genotype imputation has become an essential tool in the analysis of genome-wide association scans. This technique allows investigators to test association at ungenotyped genetic markers, and to combine results across studies that rely on different genotyping platforms. In addition, imputation is used within long-running studies to reuse genotypes produced across generations of platforms. Typically, genotypes of controls are reused and cases are genotyped on more novel platforms yielding a case-control study that is not matched for genotyping platforms. In this study, we scrutinize such a situation and validate GWAS results by actually retyping top-ranking SNPs with the Sequenom MassArray platform. We discuss the needed quality controls (QCs). In doing so, we report a considerable discrepancy between the results from imputed and retyped data when applying recommended QCs from the literature. These discrepancies appear to be caused by extrapolating differences between arrays by the process of imputation. To avoid false positive results, we recommend that more stringent QCs should be applied. We also advocate reporting the imputation quality measure (R(T)(2)) for the post-imputation QCs in publications.