Skip to main content
Log in

Impact of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium deviation on allele-based risk effect of genetic association studies and meta-analysis

  • GENETIC EPIDEMIOLOGY
  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Deviations from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) in control subjects may bias the estimates of genetic effects in genetic association studies (GAS) and meta-analysis. A large empirical evaluation was carried out to evaluate the impact of HWE deviation and explore the effect of variance adjustment for the allele-based odds ratio in 833 individual GAS and 72 meta-analyses. In individual GAS, the variance adjustment for any deviation from HWE resulted in stronger associations, and 10 GAS (1%) became significant (P < 0.05). One hundred sixteen GAS (14%) showed significant deviation from HWE (P HWE < 0.05); however, only 37 GAS (4%) had more than 90% power to detect significant deviation from HWE at the 5% level. In meta-analyses, adjustment for any deviation from HWE improved the significance in 53 meta-analyses (74%). Then, a formal statistical significance (P < 0.05) was revealed for one previously negative meta-analyses whereas one meta-analysis lost its significance. Between-study heterogeneity was enhanced in 50 meta-analyses (69%). None of the meta-analyses lost the significance of heterogeneity (P Q  < 0.10) whereas in one meta-analysis, the non significant heterogeneity became significant. Sensitivity analysis for studies not conforming to HWE (P HWE < 0.05) was applied to 45 meta-analyses (69%). Then, the significance of association was increased in 26 the meta-analyses (58%) and one meta-analysis became significant (P < 0.05) whereas seven meta-analyses (16%) were no longer significant. Adjustment for HWE deviation could be an effective strategy for dealing with HWE violations in GAS and meta-analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zintzaras E, Lau J. Synthesis of genetic association studies for pertinent gene-disease associations requires appropriate methodological and statistical approaches. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:634–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Maynard Smith J. Evolutionary genetics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wittke-Thompson JK, Pluzhnikov A, Cox NJ. Rational inferences about departures from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Am J Hum Genet. 2005;76:967–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Xu J, Turner A, Little J, et al. Positive results in association studies are associated with departure from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium: hint for genotyping error? Hum Genet. 2002;111:573–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Salanti G, Amountza G, Ntzani EE, et al. Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium in genetic association studies: an empirical evaluation of reporting, deviations, and power. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13:840–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schaid DJ, Jacobsen SJ. Biased tests of association: comparisons of allele frequencies when departing from Hardy–Weinberg proportions. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149:706–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lathrop GM. Estimating genotype relative risks. Tissue Antigens. 1983;22:160–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sato Y, Suganami H, Hamada C, et al. The confidence interval of allelic odds ratios under the Hardy–Weinberg disequilibrium. J Hum Genet. 2006;51:772–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zintzaras E. Variance estimation of allele-based odds ratio in the absence of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Eur J Epidemiol. 2008;23:323–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zintzaras E, Koufakis T, Ziakas PD, et al. A meta-analysis of genotypes and haplotypes of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene polymorphisms in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Eur J Epidemiol. 2006;21:501–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Emigh TH. Comparison of tests for Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Biometrics. 1980;36:627–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Severo NC, Zelen M. Normal approximation to the chi-square and non-central F probability functions. Biometrica. 1960;47:411–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sasieni PD. From genotypes to genes: doubling the sample size. Biometrics. 1997;53:1253–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Munafo MR, Flint J. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies. Trends Genet. 2004;20:439–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Minelli C, Thompson JR, Abrams KR, et al. How should we use information about HWE in the meta-analyses of genetic association studies? Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37:136–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fardo DW, Becker KD, Bertram L, et al. Recovering unused information in genome-wide association studies: the benefit of analyzing SNPs out of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Eur J Hum Genet. 2009;17:1676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Trikalinos TA, Salanti G, Khoury MJ, et al. Impact of violations and deviations in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium on postulated gene-disease associations. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:300–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Goldstein DB. Common genetic variation and human traits. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1696–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elias Zintzaras.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zintzaras, E. Impact of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium deviation on allele-based risk effect of genetic association studies and meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol 25, 553–560 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9467-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9467-z

Keywords

Navigation