Approaches to Familial Aggregation: Hypothesis Testing and Estimation when Families Are Selected through Parent Probands under a Variant of Single Ascertainment

• Published in: Human heredity 2004-01, Vol.57 (4), p.179-190
• Main Author: Wickramaratne, Priya J.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Data Interpretation, Statistical; Disease; Families & family life; Genetic Diseases, Inborn - epidemiology; Genetics; Humans; Hypothesis testing; Original Paper
• ISSN: 0001-5652; 1423-0062
• DOI: 10.1159/000081444

Epidemiologic approaches to testing and estimating familial aggregation of a disease consist of comparing rates of disease in relatives of individuals with the disease (known as case probands) with rates of disease in relatives of individuals without the disease (known as control probands). Gold et al. (J Am Stat Ass 1967;62:409–420) derived an explicit mathematical model and sampling methods, under which this approach is equivalent to testing the null hypotheses that the disease risk in families is homogenous. A basic assumption of this model is that every family member has the same risk of disease and that disease status is independent among family members, although the disease risk may vary between families. When the disease is suspected of having a genetic component, rather than being purely environmental, this model has been shown to be appropriate for detecting disease aggregation in siblings, when relatives are siblings of probands. This model however is unrealistic for use in nuclear families when the affected status of offspring is not independent of the affected status of parents, and these families are selected through an affected or an unaffected parent, so that a parent is the proband and relatives are offspring of probands. We extend the Gold et al. model to allow for the disease risk in offspring to vary with the affected status of the parent. We assume that families are selected through affected and unaffected parents, under a variation of single ascertainment. Under this study design, we show that the usual test of association between affected status of probands and relatives, performed by comparing sample proportions of affected relatives of affected and unaffected probands, respectively, is no longer equivalent to a test of homogeneity of disease risk in offspring. Instead, it is equivalent to testing that the disease risk in offspring is independent of the number of affected parents. This test reduces to a test of homogeneity if and only if one assumes that the variation in disease risk in offspring, between families, is solely due to the variation in the number of affected parents. As a result, we show that under this study design, the standard χ2 test must be modified in order to obtain a valid test of familial aggregation. In addition the sample proportions of affected relatives of case and control probands, respectively, are shown to provide unbiased estimates of the expected risk of disease in an offspring given an affected/unaffec