title: Precision and type I error rate in the presence of genotype errors and missing parental data: a comparison between the original transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) and TDTae statistics.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Two factors impacting robustness of the original transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) are: i) missing parental genotypes and ii) undetected genotype errors. While it is known that independently these factors can inflate false-positive rates for the original TDT, no study has considered either the joint impact of these factors on false-positive rates or the precision score of TDT statistics regarding these factors. By precision score, we mean the absolute difference between disease gene position and the position of markers whose TDT statistic exceeds some threshold.
  
  
  METHODS
  We apply our transmission disequilibrium test allowing for errors (TDTae) and the original TDT to phenotype and modified single-nucleotide polymorphism genotype simulation data from Genetic Analysis Workshop. We modify genotype data by randomly introducing genotype errors and removing a percentage of parental genotype data. We compute empirical distributions of each statistic's precision score for a chromosome harboring a simulated disease locus. We also consider inflation in type I error by studying markers on a chromosome harboring no disease locus.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The TDTae shows median precision scores of approximately 13 cM, 2 cM, 0 cM, and 0 cM at the 5%, 1%, 0.1%, and 0.01% significance levels, respectively. By contrast, the original TDT shows median precision scores of approximately 23 cM, 21 cM, 15 cM, and 7 cM at the corresponding significance levels, respectively. For null chromosomes, the original TDT falsely rejects the null hypothesis for 28.8%, 14.8%, 5.4%, and 1.7% at the 5%, 1%, 0.1% and 0.01%, significance levels, respectively, while TDTae maintains the correct false-positive rate.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Because missing parental genotypes and undetected genotype errors are unknown to the investigator, but are expected to be increasingly prevalent in multilocus datasets, we strongly recommend TDTae methods as a standard procedure, particularly where stricter significance levels are required.
authors.affiliation: Laboratory of Statistical Genetics, Rockefeller University, New York, NY 10021, USA. barrals@mail.rockefeller.edu
authors.forename: Sandra
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Barral
authors.forename: Chad
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Haynes
authors.forename: Mark A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Levenstien
authors.forename: Derek
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Gordon
mesh_terms: D002893:Chromosomes, Human, Pair 3 / Q000235:genetics; D005260:Female; D005819:Genetic Markers; D005838:Genotype; D006801:Humans; D015810:Linkage Disequilibrium / Q000235:genetics*; D008297:Male; D008957:Models, Genetic; D015233:Models, Statistical; D010290:Parents; D010375:Pedigree; D019683:Penetrance; D020641:Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide / Q000235:genetics; D012107:Research Design
chemical_list: D005819:Genetic Markers