Family‐Based Association Test (FBAT)

Abstract

Statistical tests of association are commonly used to confirm or exclude a relationship between disease and selected genetic variants. Tests based on data from unrelated individuals are popular, but can be invalid in the presence of genetic confounding, for example the sample contains individuals with different genetic ancestries. Family designs that use affected individuals and their relatives can limit the problem of validity using within‐family comparisons. The transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) is the original family test for association proposed for affected offspring and their parents. The test is simple and intuitive, is totally robust and the most powerful against an alternative that assumes an additive mode of inheritance. The family‐based association test (FBAT) is a generalisation of the TDT suitable for other family designs; other modes of inheritance; dichotomous, measured and time‐to‐onset phenotypes and haplotypes of tightly linked markers. FBATs are generally less powerful than tests based on a sample of equivalent size of unrelated individuals, but special settings exist, for example testing for rare variants with affected offspring and their parents, where the family design has a power advantage.

Key Concepts

  • Genetic tests based on population or cohort samples can be invalid owing to differing genetic ancestries.
  • Association designs using family members can reduce or avoid bias using within‐family comparison.
  • The simplest family test is the TDT which uses affected offspring and their parents.
  • FBAT refers to a class of tests for family designs that can accommodate any type of genetic model, any phenotype and any family configuration, for example parents and their offspring, sibships or even general pedigrees.
  • FBATs are based on the distribution of Mendelian transmissions from parents to offspring and thus only require that Mendel's Laws hold under the null hypothesis of no linkage and no association.
  • FBAT tests can accommodate missing parents or founders by conditioning on the observed genotype configuration in the family, or technically, on the sufficient statistics for the missing parents/founders.
  • Other methods for testing with family designs that are based on the distribution of genotypes, rather than transmissions, are not completely robust to population substructure in the presence of admixture.
  • In general, FBATs are less powerful than their population‐based counterparts, given the same amount of genotyping required, but in some circumstances, for example for rare variants, and in testing for gene–environment interactions, they can be more powerful.
  • With rare variants, it is generally considered desirable to consider jointly all rare variants in a specific region. This may require dealing with transmissions of multiple correlated variants that leads to using a number of different approximations.

Keywords: genetic association test; transmission disequilibrium test (TDT); family design; trios; discordant sibships; missing parents; Mendel's laws; Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium; linkage; linkage disequilibrium; whole‐genome sequencing (WGS); rare variants

Figure 1. Transmission of genetic variants from parents to offspring is governed by Mendel's First Law of Segregation. It forms the basis of the TDT.
close

References

Abecasis GR, Cardon LR and Cookson WO (2000) A general test of association for quantitative traits in nuclear families. American Journal of Human Genetics 66: 279–292.

Allison DB (1997) Transmission‐disequilibrium tests for quantitative traits. American Journal of Human Genetics 60: 676–690.

Chen W‐M, Manichaikul A and Rich SS (2009) A generalized family‐based association test for dichotomous traits. American Journal of Human Genetics 85: 364–376.

Cupples AL (2008) Family study designs in the age of genome‐wide association studies: experience from the Framingham Heart Study. Current Opinion in Lipidology 19: 144–150.

De G, Yip W‐K, Ionita‐Laza I and Laird N (2013) Rare variant analysis for family‐based design. PLoS ONE 8: e48495.

Dudbridge F (2008) Likelihood‐based association analysis for nuclear families and unrelated subjects with missing genotype data. Human Heredity 66: 87–98.

Gauderman WJ (2003) Candidate gene association analysis for a quantitative trait. Genetic Epidemiology 25: 327–338.

Gordon D and Ott J (2001) Assessment and management of single nucleotide polymorphism genotype errors in genetic association analysis. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 18: 29.

He Z, Zhang D, Renton AE, et al. (2017) The rare‐variant generalized disequilibrium test for association analysis of nuclear and extended pedigrees with application to Alzheimer disease WGS data. American Journal of Human Genetics 100 (2): 193–204.

Hoffmann TJ, Lange C, Vansteelandt S and Laird NM (2009) Gene–environment interaction tests for dichotomous traits in trios and sibships. Genetic Epidemiology 33: 691–699.

Horvath S, Xu X and Laird NM (2001) The family based association test method: strategies for studying general genotype‐phenotype associations. European Journal of Human Genetics 9: 301–306.

Ionita‐Laza I, Lee S, Makarov V, Buxbaum JD and Lin X (2013) Family‐based association tests for sequence data, and comparisons with population‐based association tests. European Journal of Human Genetics 21: 1158–1162.

Knapp M (1999) The transmission/disequilibrium tests and parental‐genotype reconstruction: the reconstruction‐combined transmission/disequilibrium test. American Journal of Human Genetics 64: 86170.

Laird NM, Horvath S and Xu X (2000) Implementing a unified approach to family based tests of association. Genetic Epidemiology 19: S36–S45.

Laird NM and Lange C (2006) Family based designs in the age of large‐scale gene‐association studies. Nature Reviews Genetics 7: 385–394.

Laird NM and Lange C (2011) The Fundamentals of Modern Statistical Genetics. New York: Springer. Chapters 8–9.

Lake S, Blacker D and Laird NM (2000) Family‐based tests of association in the presence of linkage. American Journal of Human Genetics 67: 1515–1525.

Lange C and Laird NM (2002) Analytical sample size and power calculations for a general class of family based association tests: dichotomous traits. American Journal of Human Genetics 71: 575–584.

Lange C, DeMeo D and Laird NM (2002) Power calculations for a general class of family‐based association tests: quantitative traits. American Journal of Human Genetics 71: 575–584.

Lange C, DeMeo D, Silverman E, Weiss S and Laird NM (2004) PBAT: tools for family‐based association studies. American Journal of Human Genetics 74: 367–369.

Lunetta KL, Faraone SV, Biederman J and Laird NM (2000) Family based tests of association and linkage that use unaffected sibs, covariates, and interactions. American Journal of Human Genetics 66: 605–614.

Martin ER, Monks SA, Warren LL and Kaplan NL (2000) A test for linkage and association in general pedigrees: the pedigree disequilibrium test. American Journal of Human Genetics 67: 146–154.

Rabinowitz D and Laird NM (2000) A unified approach to adjusting association tests for population admixture with arbitrary pedigree structure and arbitrary missing marker information. Human Heredity 50: 211–223.

Risch N and Merikangas K (1996) The future of genetics studies of complex human diseases. Science 273: 1516–1517.

Schaid DJ and Sommer SS (1996) General score tests for association of genetic markers with disease using cases and their parents. Genetic Epidemiology 13: 423–449.

Spielman RS, McGinnis RE and Ewens WJ (1993) Transmisson test for linkage disequilibrium: the insulin gene region and insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus. American Journal of Human Genetics 53: 506–516.

Spielman RS and Ewens RS (1998) A sibship test for linkage in the presence of association. American Journal of Human Genetics 62: 450–458.

Vansteelandt S, Demeo DL, Lasky‐Su J, et al. (2008) Testing and estimating gene–environment interactions in family based association studies. Biometrics 64: 458–467.

Witte JS, Gauderman WJ and Thomas DC (1999) Asymptotic bias and efficiency in case‐control studies of candidate genes and gene‐environment interactions: basic family designs. American Journal of Epidemiology 149: 693–705.

Further Reading

Ewens WJ, Li M and Spielman RS (2008) A review of family based tests for linkage disequilibrium between a quantitative trait and a genetic marker. PLoS Genetics 4: e1000180.

McGinnis R, Shiftman S and Darvasi A (2002) Power and efficiency of the TDT and case‐control design for association scans. Behavior Genetics 32: 135–144.

Risch N and Merikangas K (1996) The future of genetic studies of complex human diseases. Science 273: 1516–1517.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Laird, Nan M, and Lange, Christoph(Apr 2018) Family‐Based Association Test (FBAT). In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0022500.pub2]