Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T06:55:15.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prospects for Detecting Genotype × Environment Interactions in Twins with Breast Cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

N.G. Martin ,
L.J. Eaves  and
A.C. Heath
N.G. Martin*
Affiliation:
Department of Human Genetics, Medical College of Virginia, Richmond, USA
L.J. Eaves
Affiliation:
Department of Human Genetics, Medical College of Virginia, Richmond, USA
A.C. Heath
Affiliation:
Department of Human Genetics, Medical College of Virginia, Richmond, USA
*
Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Bramston Terrace, Brisbane 4006, Australia

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We consider a study of MZ and DZ twin pairs ascertained because one or both twins have a disease. Genotypes at a major locus are known and putative environmental risk factors have been measured for all individuals. The power of the study to estimate the effect on liability of the measured and residual genetic and environmental effects (Gm, Gr, Em, Er) and all two-way interactions between them (except Gr × Er) is estimated by simulation. If liabilities can be indexed on a continuous scale (eg, blood pressure as an index of liability to hypertension), then a study of 600 MZ and 600 DZ pairs would have sufficient power to detect quite subtle interaction effects, even if ascertainment is greatly biased toward MZ twins. If liabilities cannot be measured and only affection status is known, then the power of the study would be much lower, although not impracticably so. There appears to be no advantage in augmenting the twins with a sample of control individuals who have been drawn at random from the population regardless of disease status, at least for the case we have considered in which the disease threshold on the liability scale is assumed to be known without error. The argument is developed in terms of the utility of the design for research into breast cancer.

Keywords

TwinsGenotype × environment interactionBreast cancerDisease liabilityOncogenes
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , January 1987 , pp. 5 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1987

References

REFERENCES

1.Cavalli-Sforza, LL, Bodmer, WF (1970): The Genetics of Human Populations. San Francisco: WH Freeman.Google Scholar
2.Eaves, LJ (1984): The resolution of genotype × environment interaction in segregation analysis of nuclear families. Genet Epidemiol 1:215–228.Google Scholar
3.Elston, RC, Sobel, E (1979): Sampling considerations in the gathering and analysis of pedigree data. Am J Hum Genet 31:62–69.Google Scholar
4.Henderson, BE, Pike, MC, Ross, RK (1984): Epidemiology and risk factors. In Bonadonna, G (ed.): Breast Cancer: Diagnosis and Management. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
5.Jinks, JL, Fulker, DW (1970): Comparison of the biometrical genetical, MAVA and classical approaches to the analysis of human behavior. Psychol Bull 73:311–349.Google Scholar
6.Kendler, KS, Eaves, LJ (1986): Models for the joint effect of genotype and environment on liability to psychiatric illness. Am J Psychiatry 143:279–289.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Krontiris, TG, DiMartino, NA, Colb, M, Parkinson, DA (1985): Unique allelic restriction fragments of the human Ha-ras locus in leukocyte and tumor DNAs of cancer patients. Nature 313:369–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Lange, K, Westlake, J, Spence, MA (1976): Extensions to pedigree analysis III. Variance components by the scoring method. Ann Hum Genet 39:485–491.Google Scholar
9.Lewontin, RC (1974): The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia UP.Google Scholar
10.Martin, NG, Eaves, LJ, Kearsey, MJ, Davies, P (1978): The power of the classical twin study. Heredity 40:97–116.Google Scholar
11.Martin, NG, Eaves, LJ, Eysenck, HJ (1977): Genetical, environmental and personality factors influencing the age of first sexual intercourse in twins. J Biosoc Sci 9:91–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Mather, K, Jinks, JL (1982): Biometrical Genetics (2nd ed). London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
13.Numerical Algorithms Group (1978) E04JAF. Oxford: NAG, Mark 8.Google Scholar
14.Pearson, ES, Hartley, HO (eds): Biometrika Tables for Statisticians (Vol. 2). London: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
15.Thomas, DC, Langholz, B, Mack, T, Deapen, D, Floderus-Myrhed, B (1986): Bivariate lifetable models for analysis of gene-environment interaction in twins (submitted).Google Scholar
16.Williams, WR, Anderson, DE (1984): Genetic epidemiology of breast cancer: segregation of 200 Danish pedigrees. Genet Epidemiol 1:7–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed