Sample Size and Statistical Power Calculation in Genetic Association Studies

Abstract

A sample size with sufficient statistical power is critical to the success of genetic association studies to detect causal genes of human complex diseases. Genome-wide association studies require much larger sample sizes to achieve an adequate statistical power. We estimated the statistical power with increasing numbers of markers analyzed and compared the sample sizes that were required in case-control studies and case-parent studies. We computed the effective sample size and statistical power using Genetic Power Calculator. An analysis using a larger number of markers requires a larger sample size. Testing a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) marker requires 248 cases, while testing 500,000 SNPs and 1 million markers requires 1,206 cases and 1,255 cases, respectively, under the assumption of an odds ratio of 2, 5% disease prevalence, 5% minor allele frequency, complete linkage disequilibrium (LD), 1:1 case/control ratio, and a 5% error rate in an allelic test. Under a dominant model, a smaller sample size is required to achieve 80% power than other genetic models. We found that a much lower sample size was required with a strong effect size, common SNP, and increased LD. In addition, studying a common disease in a case-control study of a 1:4 case-control ratio is one way to achieve higher statistical power. We also found that case-parent studies require more samples than case-control studies. Although we have not covered all plausible cases in study design, the estimates of sample size and statistical power computed under various assumptions in this study may be useful to determine the sample size in designing a population-based genetic association study.

The Effect of an Extreme and Prolonged Population Bottleneck on Patterns of Deleterious Variation: Insights from the Greenlandic Inuit

“…This is potentially important for quantitative trait mapping and disease mapping since it implies that the GI population will, in some cases, be more powerful for associating variants with disease than the CEU population (Hong and Park 2012). This view is similar in spirit to what was suggested for other historically isolated populations like the Finnish and Native American populations (Peltonen et al 2000;Kristiansson et al 2008;Kurki et al 2014;Zuk et al 2014).…”

Impact of host genetic polymorphisms on vaccine induced antibody response

“…Several papers have highlighted that the careful design of a GWAS significantly improves its quality. 86,89,90 Subsequent case-control studies are required to confirm the first findings and, finally, the exploration of SNP impacts on RNA, protein and immune cell level will complement GWAS results and help to understand the underlying mechanism behind genotype-associated vaccine response (see Fig. 2).…”

“…86,88 Furthermore, the required sample size increases with the number of tested SNPs (when investigating small effects) and decreases for high minor allele frequencies and high prevalence of the investigated phenotype (e.g., weak antibody response to vaccination). 86,89,90 This is the reason why GWAS that test few SNPs in risk groups need relatively low sample sizes. In contrast, a healthy group may show a very robust immune response such that a large group needs to be tested to find a particular geno-/phenotype association.…”

Polymorphisms in the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene associated with asthma

“…Sample size has a great influence on the statistical power of polymorphism research. In general, larger sample sizes are associated with more reliable statistical results (Hong and Park, 2012). When the population or race is different, the genetic background may also be different.…”