Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(8)
A priori power calculation based on published variant frequencies and effect sizes11 using the Purcell power calculator14 suggested that a sample size of 1,089 AD cases and an equal number of general population controls would be sufficient to reach 100% power to detect an excess of rare variants with a MAF <5% under an autosomal dominant model and 36% power for recessive effects.
Analyses of individual SNP genotypes were modeled for recessive effects (homozygosity or two copies of the minor allele), dominant effects (homo- and heterozygosity combined), and additive effects (0, 1 and 2 copies of the minor allele).
Indications for recessive effects were not observed.
There was no evidence for recessive effects, as the inclusion of inbreeding coefficient did not alter the heritability estimates.
We predict that it will be very informative to analyse existing GWAS datasets to test specifically for recessive effects.
If these assumptions are violated to a substantial degree then observed departures from HWE might not necessarily provide evidence for recessive effects.
Similar(52)
The rs12048215 polymorphism was significantly associated with lower IL-1β production (P = 0.018 for dominant effect and P = 0.00016 for recessive effect).
Using this assumption and a z test for recessive effect we calculate the power of Zurdel's study (167 cases, 517 controls) to be 24.6 %.
In addition, there was a borderline significantly increasing trend of MODS scores in the patients with the A allele at -1082 locus (P = 0.088 for recessive effect).
LPS-induced TNF-a production was significantly lower in patients with the variant A allele than that in those with the wild G allele (P = 0.027 for recessive effect).
The rs2027432 polymorphism was significantly associated with higher IL-1β production, with IL-1β levels significantly higher in patients with the variant A allele than in those with the wild-type G allele (P = 0.003 for dominant effect and P < 0.0001 for recessive effect).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com