Home LiteratureArticle Details
PMID: 15026468 Published · ppublish English Journal Article

Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute ·Vol. 96 ·No. 6 ·2004-03-17 ·Pages 434-42

Wacholder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, El Ghormli L, Rothman N

Abstract

Too many reports of associations between genetic variants and common cancer sites and other complex diseases are false positives. A major reason for this unfortunate situation is the strategy of declaring statistical significance based on a P value alone, particularly, any P value below.05. The false positive report probability (FPRP), the probability of no true association between a genetic variant and disease given a statistically significant finding, depends not only on the observed P value but also on both the prior probability that the association between the genetic variant and the disease is real and the statistical power of the test. In this commentary, we show how to assess the FPRP and how to use it to decide whether a finding is deserving of attention or "noteworthy." We show how this approach can lead to improvements in the design, analysis, and interpretation of molecular epidemiology studies. Our proposal can help investigators, editors, and readers of research articles to protect themselves from overinterpreting statistically significant findings that are not likely to signify a true association. An FPRP-based criterion for deciding whether to call a finding noteworthy formalizes the process already used informally by investigators--that is, tempering enthusiasm for remarkable study findings with considerations of plausibility.

MeSH Terms
Analysis of Variance Bayes Theorem Confidence Intervals Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic False Positive Reactions Genetic Predisposition to Disease Genetic Variation Haplotypes Humans Likelihood Functions Mathematical Computing Molecular Epidemiology/methods Observer Variation Odds Ratio Risk Assessment/methods Sample Size
Authors & Affiliations
5 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Wacholder Sholom
Biostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-7244, USA. wacholder@nih.gov
Chanock Stephen
Garcia-Closas Montserrat
El Ghormli Laure
Rothman Nathaniel
References (29)
29 references, click to expand
  1. Variants in DNA double-strand break repair genes and breast cancer susceptibility.
    Hum Mol Genet. 2002 Jun 1;11(12):1399-407 PMID: 12023982
  2. Reporting, appraising, and integrating data on genotype prevalence and gene-disease associations.
    Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Aug 15;156(4):300-10 PMID: 12181099
  3. A comprehensive review of genetic association studies.
    Genet Med. 2002 Mar-Apr;4(2):45-61 PMID: 11882781
  4. Searching for genetic determinants in the new millennium.
    Nature. 2000 Jun 15;405(6788):847-56 PMID: 10866211
  5. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 2: The Bayes factor.
    Ann Intern Med. 1999 Jun 15;130(12):1005-13 PMID: 10383350
  6. Replication validity of genetic association studies.
    Nat Genet. 2001 Nov;29(3):306-9 PMID: 11600885
  7. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies supports a contribution of common variants to susceptibility to common disease.
    Nat Genet. 2003 Feb;33(2):177-82 PMID: 12524541
  8. Candidate genes and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the study of human disease.
    Dis Markers. 2001;17(2):89-98 PMID: 11673655
  9. Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests?
    BMJ. 2001 Jan 27;322(7280):226-31 PMID: 11159626
  10. Discovering genotypes underlying human phenotypes: past successes for mendelian disease, future approaches for complex disease.
    Nat Genet. 2003 Mar;33 Suppl:228-37 PMID: 12610532
  11. Synonymous mutations in the human dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) affect mRNA stability and synthesis of the receptor.
    Hum Mol Genet. 2003 Feb 1;12(3):205-16 PMID: 12554675
  12. False discovery rate in linkage and association genome screens for complex disorders.
    Genetics. 2003 Jun;164(2):829-33 PMID: 12807801
  13. Accounting for human polymorphisms predicted to affect protein function.
    Genome Res. 2002 Mar;12(3):436-46 PMID: 11875032
  14. Freely associating.
    Nat Genet. 1999 May;22(1):1-2 PMID: 10319845
  15. It's time to rehabilitate the P-value.
    Epidemiology. 2001 May;12(3):288-90 PMID: 11337598
  16. Problems of reporting genetic associations with complex outcomes.
    Lancet. 2003 Mar 8;361(9360):865-72 PMID: 12642066
  17. Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Dec;11(12):1513-30 PMID: 12496039
  18. Population stratification in epidemiologic studies of common genetic variants and cancer: quantification of bias.
    J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Jul 19;92(14):1151-8 PMID: 10904088
  19. Are all significant P values created equal? The analogy between diagnostic tests and clinical research.
    JAMA. 1987 May 8;257(18):2459-63 PMID: 3573245
  20. Genetic analysis of case/control data using estimated haplotype frequencies: application to APOE locus variation and Alzheimer's disease.
    Genome Res. 2001 Jan;11(1):143-51 PMID: 11156623
  21. Point: population stratification: a problem for case-control studies of candidate-gene associations?
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Jun;11(6):505-12 PMID: 12050090
  22. A common variant in BRCA2 is associated with both breast cancer risk and prenatal viability.
    Nat Genet. 2000 Nov;26(3):362-4 PMID: 11062481
  23. Empirical bayes methods and false discovery rates for microarrays.
    Genet Epidemiol. 2002 Jun;23(1):70-86 PMID: 12112249
  24. The future of genetic studies of complex human diseases.
    Science. 1996 Sep 13;273(5281):1516-7 PMID: 8801636
  25. 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 Jun;11(6):513-20 PMID: 12050091
  26. Pooled analysis and meta-analysis of glutathione S-transferase M1 and bladder cancer: a HuGE review.
    Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Jul 15;156(2):95-109 PMID: 12117698
  27. Tests and estimates of allelic association in complex inheritance.
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Sep 15;95(19):11389-93 PMID: 9736746
  28. NAT2 slow acetylation and bladder cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 22 case-control studies conducted in the general population.
    Pharmacogenetics. 2000 Mar;10(2):115-22 PMID: 10761999
  29. No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons.
    Epidemiology. 1990 Jan;1(1):43-6 PMID: 2081237
Article Info
Journal
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Abbr.
J Natl Cancer Inst
ISSN
1460-2105
Published
2004-03-17
Pages
434-42
Language
English
Region
United States
NLM ID
7503089
PMCID
PMC7713993
Subset
IM
Corrections
CommentIn
CommentIn
CommentIn
Analysis Services
Analysis Services

Contact

No. 2 Wenbo Road, Zhangqiu District, Jinan, Shandong

Qilu Normal University · Genelibs Bioinformatics Lab

750 Shunhua Rd, Jinan

2F, Bldg F, University Science Park

Tel: 0531-88819269

WeChat Official Account

Follow our WeChat subscription account for real-time updates and the latest in medical and biological research.


Business Email

E-mail: product@genelibs.com