Power comparison between population-based case–control studies and family-based transmission–disequilibrium tests: An empirical study.

BACKGROUND: There are two major classes of genetic association analyses: population based and family based. Population-based case–control studies have been the method of choice due to the ease of data collection. However, population stratification is one of the major limitations of case–control studies, while family-based studies are protected against stratification. In this study, we carry out extensive simulations under different disease models (both Mendelian as well as complex) to evaluate the relative powers of the two approaches in detecting association. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The power comparisons are based on a case–control design comprising 200 cases and 200 controls versus a Transmission Disequilibrium Test (TDT) or Pedigree Disequilibrium Test (PDT) design with 200 informative trios. We perform the allele-level test for case–control studies, which is based on the difference of allele frequencies at a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) between unrelated cases and controls. The TDT and the PDT are based on preferential allelic transmissions at a SNP from heterozygous parents to the affected offspring. We considered five disease modes of inheritance: (i) recessive with complete penetrance (ii) dominant with complete penetrance and (iii), (iv) and (v) complex diseases with varying levels of penetrances and phenocopies. RESULTS: We find that while the TDT/PDT design with 200 informative trios is in general more powerful than a case–control design with 200 cases and 200 controls (except when the heterozygosity at the marker locus is high), it may be necessary to sample a very large number of trios to obtain the requisite number of informative families. CONCLUSION: The current study provides insights into power comparisons between population-based and family-based association studies.

The Dopamine D2 Receptor Locus as a Modifying Gene in Korean Schizophrenia, Alcoholism and Drug Addiction

The authors attempted to examine the allelic association between the A1 allele of Dopamine D2 receptor and schizophrenia, alcoholism, drug addiction in Koreans. Schizophrenic patients(n=31), alcoholism(n=65), drug addiction(n=18) and controls(n=52) were examined by case-control study for distribution of the Taql polymorphism of the dopamine D2 receptor gene in Korean population to minimize the effect of racial differencies in gene frequencies. In schizophrenics, the numbers of schizophrenics with A1A1, A1A2, A2A2 were 9(29%), 15(48%) and 7(22%) respectively and in alcoholics with A1A1, A1A2, A2A2 were 14(21.5%), 36(55.4%) and 15(23.1%) respectively and in drug addiction with A1A1, A1A2, A2A2 were 4(7.6%), 24(46.2%) and 24(46.2%) respectively. The prevalence of the A1 allele in schizophrenics, alcoholics, drug addiction and controls were 77%, 76.9%, 67% and 53.8% respectively. And the frequency of the A1 allele in schizophrenics, alcoholics, drug addiction, and controls were 0.53 0.49, 0.39 and 0.31 respectively. There was significant difference in the frequency of the A1 allele between schizophrenics, alcoholics and controls. We also classified our alcoholic population. For classification by severity, we used the median MAST score 30 in our samples. There was also significant difference in the frequency of the A1 allele between less severe group(0.42) and more severe group(0.57). This data suggest that the A1 allele is associated with schizophrenia and alcoholism in Korean. Furthermore the prevalence of the A1 allele increased in more severely affected alcoholics. The authors conclude that our data support an allelic association between the A1 allele at dopamine D2 receptor and schizophrenia, alcoholism. These results suggest the A1 allele of the DRD2 gene is associated with a number of behavior disorders in which it may act as a modifying gene rather than as the primary etiological agent.

Allelic Association of the Dopamine D2Receptor in Korean Alcoholics

The author attempted to allelic association between the a1 allele of Dopamine D2 receptor and alcoholism in Korean. The allelic disribution of Taq I polymorphism of the D2 dopamine receptor gene with alcoholism was examined in 67 Korean alcoholics and compared with 100 Korean controls. In alcoholics, the numbers of alcoholics with A1A1, A1A2 and A2A2 were 11(16.4%), 30(44.8%) and 26(38.8%) respectively and in control with A1A1, A1A2 and A2A2 were 17(17.0%), 42(42.0%), respectively. The prevalence of the A1 allele in alcoholics was 61.2% and 59.0% in controls. And the frequency of the A1 allele in alcoholics and controls were 0.39 and 0.38, respectively. There was not significant difference in the frequency of the A1 allele between alcoholics and controls. This data suggest that the A1 allele is not associated with alcoholism in Koreans. The author conclude that our data do not support on allelic association between the A1 allele at Dopamine D2 receptor and alcoholism. Further systemized studies will be necessary to determine whether the role of allele of Dopamine D2 receptor is major effect gene or modifying effect gene in the pathogenesis of alcoholism.