Science China Mathematics

, Volume 53, Issue 11, pp 2937–2948 | Cite as

Approximating probabilities of correlated events

  • QiZhai Li
  • Gang Zheng
  • AiYi Liu
  • ZhaoHai Li
  • Kai Yu


Efron (1997) considered several approximations of p-values for simultaneous hypothesis testing. An extension of his approaches is considered here to approximate various probabilities of correlated events. Compared with multiple-integrations, our proposed method, the parallelogram formulas, based on a one-dimensional integral, not only substantially reduces the computational complexity but also maintains good accuracy. Applications of the proposed method to genetic association studies and group sequential analysis are investigated in detail. Numerical results including real data analysis and simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed method performs well.


case-control group sequential test genetic association studies MAX parallelogram 




Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Statist Soc Ser B, 57: 289–300Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies R B. Hypothesis-testing when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative. Biometrika, 1987, 74: 33–43MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Efron B. The length heuristic for simultaneous hypothesis test. Biometrika, 1997, 84: 143–157MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Efron B. Correlation and large-scale simultaneous significance testing. J Amer Statist Assoc, 2007, 102: 93–103MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Freidlin B, Zheng G, Li Z, et al. Trend tests for case-control studies of genetic markers: power, sample size and robustness. Human Heredity, 2002, 53: 146–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hsu J C. The factor analytic approach to simultaneous inference in the general linear model. J Graph Comput Statist, 1992, 1: 151–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hsu J C. Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods. London: Chapman & Hall, 1996MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunter D J, Kraft P, Jacobs K B, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies alleles in FGFR2 associated with risk of sporadic postmenopausal breast cancer. Nature Genetics, 2007, 39: 870–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jennison C, Turnbull B W. Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2000MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jennison C, Turnbull B W. Adaptive and nonadaptive group sequential tests. Biometrika, 2006, 93: 1–21MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Konig I R, Schafer H, Muller H, et al. Optimized group sequential study designs for tests of genetic linkage and association in complex diseases. Amer J Human Genetics, 2001, 69: 590–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Konig I R, Schafer H, Ziegler A, et al. Reducing sample sizes in genome scans: Group sequential study designs with futility stops. Genetic Epidemiology, 2003, 25: 339–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lan K K G, DeMets D L. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika, 1983, 70: 659–663MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li Q, Zheng G, Li Z, et al. Efficient approximation of p-value of the maximum of correlated tests, with applications to genome-wide association studies. Ann Human Genetics, 2008, 72: 397–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ninomiya Y, Fujisawa H. A conservative test for multiple comparison based on highly correlated test statistics. Biometrics, 2007, 63: 1135–1142MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    O’Brien P C, Fleming T R. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics, 1979, 3: 549–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pocock S J. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika, 1977, 64: 191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Proschan M A, Lan K K G, Wittes J T. Statistical Monitoring of Clinical Trials: A Unified Approach. New York: Springer, 2006MATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shoukri M M, Lathrop G M. Statistical testing of genetic linkage under heterogeneity. Biometrics, 1993, 49: 151–161MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sladek R, Rocheleau G, Rung J, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies novel risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Nature, 2007, 445: 881–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yan L K, Zheng G, Li Z. Two-stage group sequential robust tests in family-based association studies: controlling type I error. Ann Human Genetics, 2008, 72: 557–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yeager M, Orr N, Hayes R B, et al. Genome-wide association study of prostate cancer identifies a second risk locus at 8q24. Nature Genetics, 2007, 39: 645–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zheng G, Chen Z. Comparison of maximum statistics for hypothesis testing when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative. Biometrics, 2005, 61: 254–258MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zheng G, Gastwirth J L. On estimation of the variance in Cochran C Armitage trend tests for genetic association using case C control studies. Statist Medicine, 2006, 25: 3150–3159MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • QiZhai Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gang Zheng
    • 3
  • AiYi Liu
    • 4
  • ZhaoHai Li
    • 2
    • 5
  • Kai Yu
    • 2
  1. 1.Academy of Mathematics and Systems ScienceChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.Biostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsNational Cancer InstituteBethesdaUSA
  3. 3.Office of Biostatistics Research, National HeartLung and Blood InstituteBethesdaUSA
  4. 4.Biostatistics and Bioinformatics BranchNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentBethesdaUSA
  5. 5.Department of StatisticsGeorge Washington UniversityWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations