Size matters: just how big is BIG?: Quantifying realistic sample size requirements for human genome epidemiology
Open Access
- 1 August 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 38 (1) , 263-273
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyn147
Abstract
Background Despite earlier doubts, a string of recent successes indicates that if sample sizes are large enough, it is possible—both in theory and in practice—to identify and replicate genetic associations with common complex diseases. But human genome epidemiology is expensive and, from a strategic perspective, it is still unclear what ‘large enough’ really means. This question has critical implications for governments, funding agencies, bioscientists and the tax-paying public. Difficult strategic decisions with imposing price tags and important opportunity costs must be taken. Methods Conventional power calculations for case–control studies disregard many basic elements of analytic complexity—e.g. errors in clinical assessment, and the impact of unmeasured aetiological determinants—and can seriously underestimate true sample size requirements. This article describes, and applies, a rigorous simulation-based approach to power calculation that deals more comprehensively with analytic complexity and has been implemented on the web as ESPRESSO: (www.p3gobservatory.org/powercalculator.htm). Results Using this approach, the article explores the realistic power profile of stand-alone and nested case–control studies in a variety of settings and provides a robust quantitative foundation for determining the required sample size both of individual biobanks and of large disease-based consortia. Despite universal acknowledgment of the importance of large sample sizes, our results suggest that contemporary initiatives are still, at best, at the lower end of the range of desirable sample size. Insufficient power remains particularly problematic for studies exploring gene–gene or gene–environment interactions. Discussion Sample size calculation must be both accurate and realistic, and we must continue to strengthen national and international cooperation in the design, conduct, harmonization and integration of studies in human genome epidemiology.Keywords
This publication has 74 references indexed in Scilit:
- A common genetic risk factor for colorectal and prostate cancerNature Genetics, 2007
- Genome-wide association scan identifies a colorectal cancer susceptibility locus on chromosome 8q24Nature Genetics, 2007
- A genome-wide association scan of tag SNPs identifies a susceptibility variant for colorectal cancer at 8q24.21Nature Genetics, 2007
- Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility lociNature, 2007
- Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controlsNature, 2007
- Robust associations of four new chromosome regions from genome-wide analyses of type 1 diabetesNature Genetics, 2007
- Replicating genotype–phenotype associationsNature, 2007
- Genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility loci for Crohn disease and implicates autophagy in disease pathogenesisNature Genetics, 2007
- Variant of transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene confers risk of type 2 diabetesNature Genetics, 2006
- Meta-analysis of genetic association studies supports a contribution of common variants to susceptibility to common diseaseNature Genetics, 2003