A comparison of two collapsing methods in different approaches

Carmen Dering, Arne Schillert, Inke R. König, Andreas Ziegler*

*Corresponding author for this work
2 Citations (Scopus)


Sequencing technologies have enabled the investigation of whole genomes of many individuals in parallel. Studies have shown that the joint consideration of multiple rare variants may explain a relevant proportion of the genetic basis for disease so that grouping of rare variants, termed collapsing, can enrich the association signal. Following this assumption, we investigate the type I error and the power of two proposed collapsing methods (combined multivariate and collapsing method and the functional principal component analysis [FPCA]-based statistic) using the case-control data provided for the Genetic Analysis Workshop 18 with knowledge of the true model. Variants with a minor allele frequency (MAF) of 0.05 or less were collapsed per gene for combined multivariate and collapsing. Neither of the methods detected any of the truly associated genes reliably. Although combined multivariate and collapsing identified one gene with a power of 0.66, it had an unacceptably high false-positive rate of 75%. In contrast, FPCA covered the type I error level well but at the cost of low power. A strict filtering of variants by small MAF might lead to a better performance of the collapsing methods. Furthermore, the inclusion of information on functionality of the variants could be helpful.

Original languageEnglish
Article numberS8
JournalBMC Proceedings
Publication statusPublished - 17.06.2014


Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of two collapsing methods in different approaches'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this