The challenge of assessing complex gene- environment and gene-gene interactions

Human Genome Epidemiology: Building the Evidence for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease: Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages

  Kraft, Peter ^a   Hunter, David J ^a  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Gene environment interactions; Gene gene interactions; Genetic epidemiology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921259597     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195398441.003.0009     Document Type: Chapter

References (100)

1. Manolio TA, Brooks LD, Collins FS. A HapMap harvest of insights into the genetics of common disease. J Clin Invest 2008; 118 (5):1590-1605.
2. Hunter DJ, Kraft P. Drinking from the fire hose-statistical issues in genomewide association studies. N Engl J Med 2007; 357 (5):436-439.
3. Rothman K, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998.
4. Chatterjee N, Mukherjee B. Statistical approaches to gene-gene and gene-environment interactions. In: Rebbeck TR, Ambrosone CB, Shields PG, eds. Molecular Epidemiology: Applications in Cancer and Other Human Diseases New York: Informa Healthcare; 2008:145-168.
5. Weiss NS. Subgroup-specific associations in the face of overall null results: should we rush in or fear to tread? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17 (6):1297-1299.
6. de Silva E, Stumpf MP. HIV and the CCR5-Delta32 resistance allele. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2004; 241 (1):1-12.
7. Rothman N, Wacholder S, Caporaso NE, et al. The use of common genetic polymorphisms to enhance the epidemiologic study of environmental carcinogens. Biochim Biophys Acta 2001; 1471(2):C1-C10.
8. Thompson W. Effect modification and the limits of biological inference from epidemiologic data. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44:221-232.
9. VanderWeele TJ, Robins JM. The identification of synergism in the sufficient-component-cause framework. Epidemiology 2007; 18 (3):329-339.
10. VanderWeele TJ, Robins JM. Four types of effect modification: a classification based on directed acyclic graphs. Epidemiology 2007; 18 (5):561-568.
11. Botto L, Khoury M. Facing the challenge of complex genotypes and gene-environment interaction: the basic epidemiologic units in case-control and case-only designs. In: Khoury M, Little J, Burke W, eds. Human Genome Epidemiology: A Scientific Foundation for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004:111-126.
12. Khoury MJ, Yang Q, Gwinn M, et al. An epidemiologic assessment of genomic profiling for measuring susceptibility to common diseases and targeting interventions. Genet Med 2004; 6 (1):38-47.
13. Kraft P, Yen YC, Stram DO, et al. Exploiting gene-environment interaction to detect genetic associations. Hum Hered 2007; 63 (2):111-119.
14. Kalilani L, Atashili J. Measuring additive interaction using odds ratios. Epidemiol Perspect Innov 2006; 3:5.
15. Robins J, Greenland S. The role of model selection in causal inference from nonexperimental data. Am J Epidemiol 1986; 123:392-402.
16. Hung RJ, Brennan P, Malaveille C, et al. Using hierarchical modeling in genetic association studies with multiple markers: application to a case-control study of bladder cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004; 13 (6):1013-1021.
17. Aragaki CC, Greenland S, Probst-Hensch N, et al. Hierarchical modeling of gene-environment interactions: estimating NAT2 genotype-specific dietary effects on adenomatous polyps. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997; 6 (5):307-314.
18. Conti DV, Cortessis V, Molitor J, et al. Bayesian modeling of complex metabolic pathways. Hum Hered 2003; 56 (1-3):83-93.
19. Cortessis V, Thomas DC. Toxicokinetic genetics: an approach to gene-environment and gene-gene interactions in complex metabolic pathways. IARC Sci Publ 2004(157):127-150.
20. Hein R, Beckmann L, Chang-Claude J. Sample size requirements for indirect association studies of gene-environment interactions (G × E). Genet Epidemiol 2008; 32 (3):235-245.
21. Lewontin RC. Annotation: the analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. Am J Hum Genet 1974; 26 (3):400-411.
22. Clayton D, McKeigue PM. Epidemiological methods for studying genes and environmental factors in complex diseases. Lancet 2001; 358 (9290):1356-1360.
23. Thomas DC, Conti DV. Commentary: the concept of "Mendelian Randomization." Int J Epidemiol 2004; 33 (1):21-25.
24. Brennan P. Commentary: Mendelian randomization and gene-environment interaction. Int J Epidemiol 2004; 33 (1):17-21.
25. Nitsch D, Molokhia M, Smeeth L, et al. Limits to causal inference based on Mendelian randomization: a comparison with randomized controlled trials. Am J Epidemiol 2006; 163 (5):397-403.
26. Keavney B. Commentary: Katan's remarkable foresight: genes and causality 18 years on. Int J Epidemiol 2004; 33 (1):11-14.
27. Katan MB. Commentary: Mendelian Randomization, 18 years on. Int J Epidemiol 2004; 33 (1):10-11.
28. Thomas D, Witte J. Point: Population stratification: a problem for case-control studies of candidate gene associations? Cancer Epidemiol Prev Biom 2002; 11:505-512.
29. Wacholder S, Rothman N, Caporaso N. Counterpoint: bias from population stratification is not a major threat to the validity of conclusions from epidemiological studies of common polymorphisms and cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002; 11:513-520.
30. Cordell HJ. Epistasis: what it means, what it doesn't mean, and statistical methods to detect it in humans. Hum Mol Genet 2002; 11 (20):2463-2468.
31. Phillips PC. The language of gene interaction. Genetics 1998; 149 (3):1167-1171.
32. Bateson W, Saunders E, Punnet R, et al. Reports to the Evolution Committee of the Royal Society, Report II London: Harrison and Sons; 1905.
33. Hartwell L, Goldberg M, Reynolds A, et al. Genetics: from Genes to Genomes New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006.
34. Zeggini E, Weedon MN, Lindgren CM, et al. Replication of genome-wide association signals in UK samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science 2007; 316 (5829):1336-1341.
35. Frayling TM. Genome-wide association studies provide new insights into type 2 diabetes aetiology. Nat Rev Genet 2007; 8 (9):657-662.
36. Hill WG, Goddard ME, Visscher PM. Data and theory point to mainly additive genetic variance for complex traits. PLoS Genet 2008; 4 (2):e1000008.
37. Kathiresan S, Melander O, Anevski D, et al. Polymorphisms associated with cholesterol and risk of cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2008; 358 (12):1240-1249.
38. Maller J, George S, Purcell S, et al. Common variation in three genes, including a noncoding variant in CFH, strongly influences risk of age-related macular degeneration. Nat Genet 2006; 38 (9):1055-1059.
39. Marchini J, Donnelly P, Cardon LR. Genome-wide strategies for detecting multiple loci that influence complex diseases. Nat Genet 2005; 37 (4):413-417.
40. Evans DM, Marchini J, Morris AP, et al. Two-stage two-locus models in genome-wide association. PLoS Genet 2006; 2 (9):e157.
41. Hartman JLt, Garvik B, Hartwell L. Principles for the buffering of genetic variation. Science 2001; 291 (5506):1001-1004.
42. Reed MC, Nijhout HF, Sparks R, et al. A mathematical model of the methionine cycle. J Theor Biol 2004; 226 (1):33-43.
43. Nijhout HF, Reed MC, Budu P, et al. A mathematical model of the folate cycle: new insights into folate homeostasis. J Biol Chem 2004; 279 (53):55008-55016.
44. Dudbridge F, Koeleman BP. Rank truncated product of P-values, with application to genomewide association scans. Genet Epidemiol 2003; 25 (4):360-366.
45. Tyrer J, Pharoah PD, Easton DF. The admixture maximum likelihood test: a novel experiment-wise test of association between disease and multiple SNPs. Genet Epidemiol 2006; 30 (7):636-643.
46. Schaid DJ, McDonnell SK, Hebbring SJ, et al. Nonparametric tests of association of multiple genes with human disease. Am J Hum Genet 2005; 76 (5):780-793.
47. Chatterjee N, Kalaylioglu Z, Moslehi R, et al. Powerful multilocus tests of genetic association in the presence of gene-gene and gene-environment interactions. Am J Hum Genet 2006; 79 (6):1002-1016.
48. Kwee LC, Liu D, Lin X, et al. A powerful and flexible multilocus association test for quantitative traits. Am J Hum Genet 2008; 82 (2):386-397.
49. Tasan M, Tian W, Hill DP, et al. An en masse phenotype and function prediction system for Mus musculus. Genome Biol 2008; 9(Suppl 1):S8.
50. Chen Y, Zhu J, Lum PY, et al. Variations in DNA elucidate molecular networks that cause disease. Nature 2008; 452 (7186):429-435.
51. Cook NR, Zee RY, Ridker PM. Tree and spline based association analysis of gene-gene interaction models for ischemic stroke. Stat Med 2004; 23 (9):1439-1453.
52. Kooperberg C, Ruczinski I. Identifying interacting SNPs using Monte Carlo logic regression. Genet Epidemiol 2005; 28 (2):157-170.
53. Ritchie MD, Hahn LW, Roodi N, et al. Multifactor-dimensionality reduction reveals high-order interactions among estrogen-metabolism genes in sporadic breast cancer. Am J Hum Genet 2001; 69 (1):138-147.
54. Millstein J, Conti D, Gilliland F, et al. A testing framework for identifying susceptibility genes in the presence of epistasis. Am J Hum Genet 2006; 78:15-27.
55. Bureau A, Dupuis J, Falls K, et al. Identifying SNPs predictive of phenotype using random forests. Genet Epidemiol 2005; 28 (2):171-182.
56. Kraft P. Curses-winner's and otherwise-in genetic epidemiology. Epidemiology 2008; 19 (5):649-651; discussion 57-58.
57. Ioannidis JP. Microarrays and molecular research: noise discovery? Lancet 2005; 365 (9458):454-455.
58. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The Elements of Statistical Learning New York: Springer; 2001.
59. Ulrich CM, Nijhout HF, Reed MC. Mathematical modeling: epidemiology meets systems biology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15 (5):827-829.
60. Haldane JB. A defense of beanbag genetics. Perspect Biol Med 1964; 7:343-359.
61. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2005; 2 (8):e124.
62. Ioannidis JP. Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology 2008; 19 (5):640-648.
63. Thomas D. Genetic epidemiology with a capital "E." Genet Epidemiol 2000; 19:289-300.
64. Garcia-Closas M, Wacholder S, Caporaso N, et al. Inference issues in cohort and case-control studies of genetic effects and gene-environment interactions. In: Khoury M, Little J, Burke W, eds. Human Genome Epidemiology: A Scientific Foundation for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004:127-144.
65. Caparaso N, Rothman N, Wacholder W. Case-control studies of common alleles and environmental factors. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 26:25-30.
66. Langholz B, Rothman N, Wacholder S, et al. Cohort studies for characterizing measured genes. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 26:39-42.
67. Laird N, Horvath S, Xu X. Implementing a unified approach to family-based tests of association. Genet Epidemiol 2000; 19(Suppl1):S36-S42.
68. Weinberg C, Umbach D. Choosing a retrospective design to assess joint genetic and environmental contributions to risk. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 152:197-203.
69. Witte JS, Gauderman WJ, Thomas DC. Asymptotic bias and efficiency in case-control studies of candidate genes and gene-environment interactions: basic family designs. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 148:693-705.
70. Cordell HJ, Barratt BJ, Clayton DG. Case/pseudocontrol analysis in genetic association studies: a unified framework for detection of genotype and haplotype associations, gene-gene and gene-environment interactions, and parent-of-origin effects. Genet Epidemiol 2004; 26 (3):167-185.
71. Gauderman W. Sample size requirements for matched case-control studies of gene-environment interaction. Stat Med 2001; 15:35-50.
72. Cardon LR, Palmer LJ. Population stratification and spurious allelic association. Lancet 2003; 361 (9357):598-604.
73. Wacholder S, Rothman N, Caporaso N. Population stratification in epidemiologic studies of common genetic variants and cancer: quantification of bias. JNCI 2000; 92:1151-1158.
74. Kittles RA, Chen W, Panguluri RK, et al. CYP3A4-V and prostate cancer in African Americans: causal or confounding association because of population stratification? Hum Genet 2002; 110 (6):553-560.
75. Devlin B, Roeder K. Genomic control for association studies. Biometrics 1999; 55:997-1004.
76. Reich D, Goldstein D. Detecting association in a case-control study while correcting for population stratification. Genet Epidemiol 2001; 20:4-16.
77. Pritchard J, Stephens M, Rosenberg N, et al. Association mapping in structured populations. Am J Hum Genet 2000; 67:170-181.
78. Bonilla C, Parra EJ, Pfaff CL, et al. Admixture in the Hispanics of the San Luis Valley, Colorado, and its implications for complex trait gene mapping. Ann Hum Genet 2004; 68(Pt 2):139-153.
79. Price AL, Patterson NJ, Plenge RM, et al. Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet 2006; 38 (8):904-909.
80. Luca D, Ringquist S, Klei L, et al. On the use of general control samples for genome-wide association studies: genetic matching highlights causal variants. Am J Hum Genet 2008; 82 (2):453-463.
81. Garcia-Closas M, Thompson WD, Robins JM. Differential misclassification and the assessment of gene-environment interactions in case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 1998; 147 (5):426-433.
82. Garcia-Closas M, Rothman N, Lubin J. Misclassification in case-control studies of gene-environment interactions: assessment of bias and sample size. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999; 8 (12):1043-1050.
83. Wong MY, Day NE, Luan JA, et al. The detection of gene-environment interaction for continuous traits: should we deal with measurement error by bigger studies or better measurement? Int J Epidemiol 2003; 32 (1):51-57.
84. Wong MY, Day NE, Luan JA, et al. Estimation of magnitude in gene-environment interactions in the presence of measurement error. Stat Med 2004; 23 (6):987-998.
85. Carr KM, Rosenblatt K, Petricoin EF, et al. Genomic and proteomic approaches for studying human cancer: prospects for true patient-tailored therapy. Hum Genomics 2004; 1 (2):134-140.
86. Piegorsch W, Weinberg C, Taylor J. Non-hierarchical logistic models and case-only designs for assessing susceptibility in population-based case-control studies. Stat Med 1994; 13:153-162.
87. Liu X, Fallin MD, Kao WH. Genetic dissection methods: designs used for tests of gene-environment interaction. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2004; 14 (3):241-245.
88. Goldstein A, Andrieu N. Detection of interaction involving identified genes: available study designs. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 26:49-54.
89. Chatterjee N, Kalaylioglu Z, Carroll R. Exploiting gene-environment independence in family-based case-control studies: increased power for detecting associations, interactions and joint effects. Genet Epidemiol 2005; 28 (2):138-156.
90. Chatterjee N, Carroll R. Semiparametric maximum likelihood estimation exploiting gene-environment independence. Biometrika 2005; 92:399-418.
91. Umbach D, Weinberg C. Designing and analysing case-control studies to exploit independence of genotype and exposure. Stat Med 1997; 16:1731-1743.
92. Mukherjee B, Ahn J, Gruber SB, et al. Tests for gene-environment interaction from case-control data: a novel study of type I error, power and designs. Genet Epidemiol 2008; 32 (7):615-626.
93. Smith PG, Day NE. The design of case-control studies: the influence of confounding and interaction effects. Int J Epidemiol 1984; 13 (3):356-365.
94. Wacholder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, et al. Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96 (6):434-442.
95. Hirschhorn JN, Altshuler D. Once and again-issues surrounding replication in genetic association studies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002; 87 (10):4438-4441.
96. UK Biobank Homepage,. Accessed August 15, 2009.
97. Hunter DJ, Riboli E, Haiman CA, et al. A candidate gene approach to searching for low-penetrance breast and prostate cancer genes. Nat Rev Cancer 2005; 5 (12):977-985.
98. Hunter DJ, Altshuler D, Rader DJ. From Darwin's finches to canaries in the coalmine-mining the genome for new biology. N Engl J Med 2008; 358 (26):2760-2763.
99. Haga SB, Khoury MJ, Burke W. Genomic profiling to promote a healthy lifestyle: not ready for prime time. Nat Genet 2003; 34 (4):347-350.
100. Hunter DJ, Khoury MJ, Drazen JM. Letting the genome out of the bottle-will we get our wish? N Engl J Med 2008; 358 (2):105-107.