MOTIVATION: The question of how to best use information from known associated variants when conducting disease association studies has yet to be answered. Some studies compute a marginal P-value for each Several Nucleotide Polymorphisms independently, ignoring previously discovered variants. Other studies include known variants as covariates in logistic regression, but a weakness of this standard conditioning strategy is that it does not account for disease prevalence and non-random ascertainment, which can induce a correlation structure between candidate variants and known associated variants even if the variants lie on different chromosomes. Here, we propose a new conditioning approach, which is based in part on the classical technique of liability threshold modeling. Roughly, this method estimates model parameters for each known variant while accounting for the published disease prevalence from the epidemiological literature. RESULTS: We show via simulation and application to empirical datasets that our approach outperforms both the no conditioning strategy and the standard conditioning strategy, with a properly controlled false-positive rate. Furthermore, in multiple data sets involving diseases of low prevalence, standard conditioning produces a severe drop in test statistics whereas our approach generally performs as well or better than no conditioning. Our approach may substantially improve disease gene discovery for diseases with many known risk variants. AVAILABILITY: LTSOFT software is available online http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/faculty/alkes-price/software/.

High coverage whole genome sequencing provides near complete information about genetic variation. However, other technologies can be more efficient in some settings by (a) reducing redundant coverage within samples and (b) exploiting patterns of genetic variation across samples. To characterize as many samples as possible, many genetic studies therefore employ lower coverage sequencing or SNP array genotyping coupled to statistical imputation. To compare these approaches individually and in conjunction, we developed a statistical framework to estimate genotypes jointly from sequence reads, array intensities, and imputation. In European samples, we find similar sensitivity (89%) and specificity (99.6%) from imputation with either 1× sequencing or 1 M SNP arrays. Sensitivity is increased, particularly for low-frequency polymorphisms (MAF < 5%), when low coverage sequence reads are added to dense genome-wide SNP arrays--the converse, however, is not true. At sites where sequence reads and array intensities produce different sample genotypes, joint analysis reduces genotype errors and identifies novel error modes. Our joint framework informs the use of next-generation sequencing in genome wide association studies and supports development of improved methods for genotype calling.