Genome-wide association study: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m →‎Results: wording, comma, and rm "gaps" for 1,000s (not necessary)
m →‎Methods: found one relevant reference for a 'citation needed'
Line 14: Line 14:
[[File:Method example for GWA study designs.png|thumb|300px|Example calculation illustrating the methodology of a case-control GWA study. The [[allele]] count of each measured SNP is evaluated, in this case with a [[chi-squared test]], in order to identify variants [[Genetic association|associated]] with the trait in question. The numbers in this example are taken from a 2007 study of [[coronary artery disease]] (CAD) which showed that the individuals with the G-allele of SNP1 (''rs1333049'') were overrepresented amongst CAD-patients.<ref name="pmid17554300">{{cite journal | author = Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium | title = Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls | journal = Nature | volume = 447 | issue = 7145 | pages = 661–78 | year = 2007 | month = June | pmid = 17554300 | pmc = 2719288 | doi = 10.1038/nature05911 | url = }}</ref>]]
[[File:Method example for GWA study designs.png|thumb|300px|Example calculation illustrating the methodology of a case-control GWA study. The [[allele]] count of each measured SNP is evaluated, in this case with a [[chi-squared test]], in order to identify variants [[Genetic association|associated]] with the trait in question. The numbers in this example are taken from a 2007 study of [[coronary artery disease]] (CAD) which showed that the individuals with the G-allele of SNP1 (''rs1333049'') were overrepresented amongst CAD-patients.<ref name="pmid17554300">{{cite journal | author = Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium | title = Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls | journal = Nature | volume = 447 | issue = 7145 | pages = 661–78 | year = 2007 | month = June | pmid = 17554300 | pmc = 2719288 | doi = 10.1038/nature05911 | url = }}</ref>]]


The most common approach of GWA studies is the [[Case-control study|case-control]] setup which compares two large groups of individuals, one healthy control group and one case group affected by a disease. All individuals in each group are genotyped for the majority of common known SNPs. The exact number of SNPs depends on the study, but is typically around a million.{{cn|date=January 2013}} For each of these SNPs it is then investigated if the [[allele frequency]] is significantly altered between the case and the control group.<ref name="pmid21293453">{{cite journal | author = Clarke GM, Anderson CA, Pettersson FH, Cardon LR, Morris AP, Zondervan KT | title = Basic statistical analysis in genetic case-control studies | journal = Nat Protoc | volume = 6 | issue = 2 | pages = 121–33 | year = 2011 | month = February | pmid = 21293453 | pmc = 3154648 | doi = 10.1038/nprot.2010.182 }}</ref> In such setups, the fundamental unit for reporting effect sizes is the [[odds ratio]]. The odds ratio reports the ratio between two proportions, which in the context of GWA studies are the proportion of individuals in the case group having a specific allele, and the proportions of individuals in the control group having the same allele. When the allele frequency in the case group is much higher than in the control group, the odds ratio will be higher than 1, and vice versa for lower allele frequency. Additionally, a [[P-value]] for the significance of the odds ratio is typically calculated using a simple [[chi-squared test]]. Finding odds ratios that are significantly different from 1 is the objective of the GWA study because this shows that a SNP is associated with disease.<ref name="pmid21293453" />
The most common approach of GWA studies is the [[Case-control study|case-control]] setup which compares two large groups of individuals, one healthy control group and one case group affected by a disease. All individuals in each group are genotyped for the majority of common known SNPs. The exact number of SNPs depends on the genotyping technology, but are typically one million or more.<ref name="pmid23300413">{{cite journal| author=Bush WS, Moore JH| title=Chapter 11: genome-wide association studies. | journal=PLoS Comput Biol | year= 2012 | volume= 8 | issue= 12 | pages= e1002822 | pmid=23300413 | doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002822 | pmc=PMC3531285 | url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&tool=sumsearch.org/cite&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=23300413 }} </ref> For each of these SNPs it is then investigated if the [[allele frequency]] is significantly altered between the case and the control group.<ref name="pmid21293453">{{cite journal | author = Clarke GM, Anderson CA, Pettersson FH, Cardon LR, Morris AP, Zondervan KT | title = Basic statistical analysis in genetic case-control studies | journal = Nat Protoc | volume = 6 | issue = 2 | pages = 121–33 | year = 2011 | month = February | pmid = 21293453 | pmc = 3154648 | doi = 10.1038/nprot.2010.182 }}</ref> In such setups, the fundamental unit for reporting effect sizes is the [[odds ratio]]. The odds ratio reports the ratio between two proportions, which in the context of GWA studies are the proportion of individuals in the case group having a specific allele, and the proportions of individuals in the control group having the same allele. When the allele frequency in the case group is much higher than in the control group, the odds ratio will be higher than 1, and vice versa for lower allele frequency. Additionally, a [[P-value]] for the significance of the odds ratio is typically calculated using a simple [[chi-squared test]]. Finding odds ratios that are significantly different from 1 is the objective of the GWA study because this shows that a SNP is associated with disease.<ref name="pmid21293453" />


There are several variations to this case-control approach. A common alternative to case-control GWA studies is the analysis of quantitative phenotypic data, e.g. height or [[Biomarker (medicine)|biomarker]] concentrations or even [[Expression quantitative trait loci|gene expression]]. Likewise, alternative statistics designed for [[Dominance (genetics)|dominance]] or [[recessive]] penetrance patterns can be used.<ref name="pmid21293453" /> Calculations are typically done using [[bioinformatics]] software such as PLINK, which also includes support for many of these alternative statistics.<ref name="pmid17701901">{{cite journal | author = Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MA, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PI, Daly MJ, Sham PC | title = PLINK: A Tool Set for Whole-Genome Association and Population-Based Linkage Analyses | journal = Am. J. Hum. Genet. | volume = 81 | issue = 3 | pages = 559–75 | year = 2007 | month = September | pmid = 17701901 | pmc = 1950838 | doi = 10.1086/519795 }}</ref>
There are several variations to this case-control approach. A common alternative to case-control GWA studies is the analysis of quantitative phenotypic data, e.g. height or [[Biomarker (medicine)|biomarker]] concentrations or even [[Expression quantitative trait loci|gene expression]]. Likewise, alternative statistics designed for [[Dominance (genetics)|dominance]] or [[recessive]] penetrance patterns can be used.<ref name="pmid21293453" /> Calculations are typically done using [[bioinformatics]] software such as PLINK, which also includes support for many of these alternative statistics.<ref name="pmid17701901">{{cite journal | author = Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MA, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PI, Daly MJ, Sham PC | title = PLINK: A Tool Set for Whole-Genome Association and Population-Based Linkage Analyses | journal = Am. J. Hum. Genet. | volume = 81 | issue = 3 | pages = 559–75 | year = 2007 | month = September | pmid = 17701901 | pmc = 1950838 | doi = 10.1086/519795 }}</ref>

Revision as of 22:21, 19 January 2013

An illustration of a Manhattan plot depicting several strongly associated risk loci. Each dot represents a SNP, with the X-axis showing genomic location and Y-axis showing association level. This example is taken from a GWA study investigating microcirculation, so the tops indicates genetic variants that more often are found in individuals with constrictions in small blood vessels.[1]

In genetic epidemiology, a genome-wide association study (GWA study, or GWAS), also known as whole genome association study (WGA study, or WGAS), is an examination of many common genetic variants in different individuals to see if any variant is associated with a trait. GWAS typically focus on associations between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and traits like major diseases.

These studies normally compare the DNA of two groups of participants: people with the disease (cases) and similar people without (controls). Each person gives a sample of DNA, from which millions of genetic variants are read using SNP arrays. If one type of the variant (one allele) is more frequent in people with the disease, the SNP is said to be "associated" with the disease. The associated SNPs are then considered to mark a region of the human genome which influences the risk of disease. In contrast to methods which specifically test one or a few genetic regions, the GWA studies investigate the entire genome. The approach is therefore said to be non-candidate-driven in contrast to gene-specific candidate-driven studies. GWA studies identify SNPs and other variants in DNA which are associated with a disease, but cannot on their own specify which genes are causal.[2][3][4]

The first successful GWA study was published in 2005 and investigated patients age-related macular degeneration. It found two SNPs which had significantly altered allele frequency when comparing with healthy controls.[5] As of 2011, hundreds or thousands of individuals are tested, over 1,200 human GWA studies have examined over 200 diseases and traits, and almost 4,000 SNP associations have been found.[6] Several GWA studies have received criticism for omitting important quality control steps, rendering the findings invalid, but modern publications address these issues. However, the methodology itself still has opponents.

Background

Any two human genomes differ in millions of different ways. There are small variations in the individual nucleotides of the genomes (SNPs) as well as many larger variations; deletions, insertions and copy number variations. Any of these may cause alterations in an individual's traits, or phenotype, which can be anything from disease risk to physical properties such as height.[7] Around the year 2000, prior to the introduction of GWA studies, the primary method of investigation was through inheritance studies of genetic linkage in families. This approach had proven highly useful towards single gene disorders[8] However, for common and complex diseases the results of genetic linkage studies proved hard to reproduce.[7][9] A suggested alternative to linkage studies was the genetic association study. This study type asks if the allele of a genetic variant is found more often than expected in individuals with the phenotype of interest (e.g. with the disease being studied). Early calculations on statistical power indicated that this approach could be better than linkage studies at detecting weak genetic effects.[10]

In addition to the conceptual framework other enabling factors made GWA studies possible. One was the advent of biobanks, which are repositories of human genetic material which greatly reduced the cost and difficulty of collecting sufficient numbers of biological specimens for study.[11] Another was the International HapMap Project which from 2003 had identified a majority of the common SNPs which are interrogated in a GWA study.[12] The haploblock structure identified by HapMap project also allowed the focus on the subset of SNPs that would describe most of the variation. Also the development of the methods to genotype all these SNPs using genotyping arrays was an important prerequisite.[13]

Methods

Example calculation illustrating the methodology of a case-control GWA study. The allele count of each measured SNP is evaluated, in this case with a chi-squared test, in order to identify variants associated with the trait in question. The numbers in this example are taken from a 2007 study of coronary artery disease (CAD) which showed that the individuals with the G-allele of SNP1 (rs1333049) were overrepresented amongst CAD-patients.[14]

The most common approach of GWA studies is the case-control setup which compares two large groups of individuals, one healthy control group and one case group affected by a disease. All individuals in each group are genotyped for the majority of common known SNPs. The exact number of SNPs depends on the genotyping technology, but are typically one million or more.[15] For each of these SNPs it is then investigated if the allele frequency is significantly altered between the case and the control group.[16] In such setups, the fundamental unit for reporting effect sizes is the odds ratio. The odds ratio reports the ratio between two proportions, which in the context of GWA studies are the proportion of individuals in the case group having a specific allele, and the proportions of individuals in the control group having the same allele. When the allele frequency in the case group is much higher than in the control group, the odds ratio will be higher than 1, and vice versa for lower allele frequency. Additionally, a P-value for the significance of the odds ratio is typically calculated using a simple chi-squared test. Finding odds ratios that are significantly different from 1 is the objective of the GWA study because this shows that a SNP is associated with disease.[16]

There are several variations to this case-control approach. A common alternative to case-control GWA studies is the analysis of quantitative phenotypic data, e.g. height or biomarker concentrations or even gene expression. Likewise, alternative statistics designed for dominance or recessive penetrance patterns can be used.[16] Calculations are typically done using bioinformatics software such as PLINK, which also includes support for many of these alternative statistics.[17]

In addition to the calculation of association, it is common to take several variables into account that could potentially confound the results. Sex and age are common examples of this. Moreover, it is also known that many genetic variations are associated with the geographical and historical populations in which the mutations first arose.[18] Because of this association, studies must take account of the geographical and ethnical background of participants by controlling for what is called population stratification.

After odds ratios and P-values have been calculated for all SNPs, a common approach is to create a Manhattan plot. In the context of GWA studies, this plot shows the negative logarithm of the P-value as a function of genomic location. Thus the SNPs with the most significant association will stand out on the plot, usually as stacks of points because of haploblock structure. Importantly, the P-value threshold for significance is corrected for multiple testing issues. The exact threshold varies by study, but typically P-values must be very low (10 to the power of -7 or -8) to be considered significant in the face of the millions of tested SNPs.[citation needed] In addition modern GWA studies typically utilize a setup where the first analysis is performed in a discovery cohort, followed by validation of the most significant SNPs in an independent validation cohort.[16]

Results

Regional association plot, showing individual SNPs in the LDL receptor region and their association to LDL-cholesterol levels. This type of plot is similar to the Manhattan plot in the lead section, but for a more limited section of the genome. The haploblock structure is visualized with colour scale and the association level is given by the left Y-axis. The dot representing the rs73015013 SNP (in the top-middle) has a high Y-axis location because this SNP explains some of the variation in LDL-cholesterol.[19]

Attempts have been made at creating comprehensive catalogues of SNPs that have been identified from GWA studies.[20] In light of the rapid advances in the field, however, more updated resources might be found in recent initiatives aimed at compiling databases through wiki-style approaches. At any rate, SNPs associated with diseases are currently numbered in the thousands.[6]

Of particular interest is the first GWA study from 2005, which compared 96 patients with age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) with 50 healthy controls.[21] It identified two SNPs with significantly altered allele frequency between the two groups. These SNPs were located in the gene encoding complement factor H, which was an unexpected finding in the research of ARMD. The findings from these first GWA studies have subsequently prompted further functional research towards therapeutical manipulation of the complement system in ARMD.[22] Another landmark publication in the history of GWA studies was the 2007 Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. This was the largest GWA study to date,[when?] providing investigations of coronary heart disease, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, bipolar disorder, and hypertension. This study was successful in uncovering many new disease genes underlying these diseases.[23][24]

Since these first landmark GWA studies, there have been two general trends.[citation needed] One has been towards larger and larger sample sizes. At the end of 2011, the largest sample sizes were in the range of 200,000 individuals.[25] The reason is the drive towards reliably detecting risk-SNPs that have smaller odds ratios and lower allele frequency. Another trend has been towards the use of more narrowly defined phenotypes, such as blood lipids, proinsulin or similar biomarkers.[26][27] These are termed intermediate phenotypes and their analyses are suggested to be of value to functional research into biomarkers.[28]

A central point of debate on GWA studies has been that most of the SNP variations found by GWA studies are associated with only a small increased risk of the disease, and have only a small predictive value. The median odds ratio is 1.33 per risk-SNP, with only a few showing odds ratios above 3.0.[2][29] These magnitudes are considered small because they do not explain much of the heritable variation. This heritable variation is known from heritability studies based on monozygotic twins.[30] For example it is known that 80–90% of height is heritable. This means that if 29 cm separates the tallest 5% from the shortest 5% of the population, then genetics account for 27 cm. Of these 27 cm, however, the GWA studies only account for a minority. In the height example it is 6 cm, and for most other major complex phenotypes it is a similar small fraction.[30]

GWA studies can help identify SNPs that affect drug action, which in turn may lead to a mechanistic understanding.[31]

Clinical applications

One of the challenges for a successful GWA study in the future will be to apply the findings in a way that accelerates drug and diagnostics development, including better integration of genetic studies into the drug-development process and a focus on the role of genetic variation in maintaining health as a blueprint for designing new drugs and diagnostics.[32] Several studies have looked into the use of risk-SNP markers as a means of directly improving the accuracy of prognosis. Some have found that the accuracy of prognosis improves,[33] while others report only minor benefits from this use.[34] Generally, a problem with this direct approach is the small magnitudes of the effects observed. A small effect ultimately translates into a poor separation of cases and controls and thus only a small improvement of prognosis accuracy. An alternative application is therefore the potential for GWA studies to elucidate pathophysiology.[35]

One such success is related to identifying the genetic variant associating with response to anti-hepatitis C virus treatment. For genotype 1 hepatitis C treated with Pegylated interferon-alpha-2a or Pegylated interferon-alpha-2b combined with ribavirin, a GWA study[36] has shown that SNPs near the human IL28B gene, encoding interferon lambda 3, are associated with significant differences in response to the treatment. A later report demonstrated that the same genetic variants are also associated with the natural clearance of the genotype 1 hepatitis C virus.[37]

The goal of elucidating pathophysiology has also led to increased interest in the association between risk-SNPs and the gene expression of nearby genes, the so-called eQTL studies.[38] The reason is that GWAS studies identify risk-SNPs, but not risk-genes, and specification of genes is one step closer towards actionable drug targets. As a result, major GWA studies of 2011 typically included extensive eQTL analysis.[39][40][41] One of the strongests eQTL effects observed for a GWA-identified risk SNP is the SORT1 locus.[26] Functional follow up studies of this locus using small interfering RNA and gene knock-out mice have shed light on the metabolism of low-density lipoprotein, which have important clinical implications for cardiovascular disease.[26][42][43]

Limitations

GWA studies have several issues and limitations that can be taken care of through proper quality control and study setup. Lack of well defined case and control groups, insufficient sample size, control for multiple testing and control for population stratification are common problems.[3] To this end it has been noted "the GWA approach can be problematic because the massive number of statistical tests performed presents an unprecedented potential for false-positive results".[3] Ignoring these correctible issues has been cited as contributing to a general sense of problems with the GWA methodology.[44] In addition to easily correctible problems such as these, some more subtle but important issues have surfaced. A high profile GWA study investigating individuals with very long life spans in order to identify SNPs associated with longevity has been mentioned as an example of this.[45] The publication came under scrutiny because of a discrepancy between the type of genotyping array in the case and control group, which caused several SNPs to be falsely highlighted as associated to longevity.[46] The study was subsequently retracted.[47]

In addition to these preventable issues, GWA studies have attracted more fundamental criticsm.[citation needed] GWA studies are necessarily broad in scope: that is they search the entire genome for associations rather than focusing on small candidate areas. This aspect of GWA has attracted the criticism that, although it could not have been known prospectively, GWA was ultimately not worth the expenditure.[35] Alternative strategies suggested involve linkage analysis, as explained in the background section of this article. More recently, the rapidly decreasing price of complete genome sequencing have also provided a realistic alternative to genotyping array-based GWA studies. It can be discussed if the use of this new technique will still be referred to as a GWA study, but high-throughput sequencing does have potential to side-step some of the shortcomings of non-sequencing GWA.[48]

See also

References

  1. ^ Ikram MK, Sim X, Xueling S; et al. (2010). McCarthy, Mark I (ed.). "Four novel Loci (19q13, 6q24, 12q24, and 5q14) influence the microcirculation in vivo". PLoS Genet. 6 (10): e1001184. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001184. PMC 2965750. PMID 21060863. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  2. ^ a b Manolio TA; Guttmacher, Alan E.; Manolio, Teri A. (2010). "Genomewide association studies and assessment of the risk of disease". N. Engl. J. Med. 363 (2): 166–76. doi:10.1056/NEJMra0905980. PMID 20647212. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  3. ^ a b c Pearson TA, Manolio TA (2008). "How to interpret a genome-wide association study". JAMA. 299 (11): 1335–44. doi:10.1001/jama.299.11.1335. PMID 18349094. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  4. ^ "Genome-Wide Association Studies". National Human Genome Research Institute.
  5. ^ Klein RJ, Zeiss C, Chew EY, Tsai JY, Sackler RS, Haynes C, Henning AK, SanGiovanni JP, Mane SM, Mayne ST, Bracken MB, Ferris FL, Ott J, Barnstable C, Hoh J (2005). "Complement Factor H Polymorphism in Age-Related Macular Degeneration". Science. 308 (5720): 385–9. doi:10.1126/science.1109557. PMC 1512523. PMID 15761122. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  6. ^ a b Johnson AD, O'Donnell CJ (2009). "An Open Access Database of Genome-wide Association Results". BMC Med. Genet. 10: 6. doi:10.1186/1471-2350-10-6. PMC 2639349. PMID 19161620.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  7. ^ a b Strachan T, Read A. Human Molecular Genetics (4 ed.). Garland Science. pp. 467–495. ISBN 978-0-8153-4149-9. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  8. ^ "Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man". Retrieved 6 December 2011.
  9. ^ Altmüller J, Palmer LJ, Fischer G, Scherb H, Wjst M (2001). "Genomewide Scans of Complex Human Diseases: True Linkage Is Hard to Find". Am. J. Hum. Genet. 69 (5): 936–50. doi:10.1086/324069. PMC 1274370. PMID 11565063. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ Risch N, Merikangas K (1996). "The future of genetic studies of complex human diseases". Science. 273 (5281): 1516–7. doi:10.1126/science.273.5281.1516. PMID 8801636. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  11. ^ Greely HT (2007). "The uneasy ethical and legal underpinnings of large-scale genomic biobanks". Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 8: 343–64. doi:10.1146/annurev.genom.7.080505.115721. PMID 17550341.
  12. ^ The International HapMap Project, Gibbs RA, Belmont JW, Hardenbol P, Willis TD, Yu F, Yang H, Ch'Ang L-Y, Huang W (2003). "The International HapMap Project". Nature. 426 (6968): 789–96. doi:10.1038/nature02168. PMID 14685227. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ^ Schena M, Shalon D, Davis RW, Brown PO (1995). "Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray". Science. 270 (5235): 467–70. doi:10.1126/science.270.5235.467. PMID 7569999. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ^ Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (2007). "Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls". Nature. 447 (7145): 661–78. doi:10.1038/nature05911. PMC 2719288. PMID 17554300. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  15. ^ Bush WS, Moore JH (2012). "Chapter 11: genome-wide association studies". PLoS Comput Biol. 8 (12): e1002822. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002822. PMC 3531285. PMID 23300413.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  16. ^ a b c d Clarke GM, Anderson CA, Pettersson FH, Cardon LR, Morris AP, Zondervan KT (2011). "Basic statistical analysis in genetic case-control studies". Nat Protoc. 6 (2): 121–33. doi:10.1038/nprot.2010.182. PMC 3154648. PMID 21293453. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. ^ Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MA, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PI, Daly MJ, Sham PC (2007). "PLINK: A Tool Set for Whole-Genome Association and Population-Based Linkage Analyses". Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81 (3): 559–75. doi:10.1086/519795. PMC 1950838. PMID 17701901. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  18. ^ Novembre J, Johnson T, Bryc K, Kutalik Z, Boyko AR, Auton A, Indap A, King KS, Bergmann S, Nelson MR, Stephens M, Bustamante CD (2008). "Genes mirror geography within Europe". Nature. 456 (7218): 98–101. doi:10.1038/nature07331. PMC 2735096. PMID 18758442. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  19. ^ Sanna S, Li B, Mulas A, Sidore C, Kang HM, Jackson AU, Piras MG, Usala G, Maninchedda G, Sassu A, Serra F, Palmas MA, Wood WH, Njølstad I, Laakso M, Hveem K, Tuomilehto J, Lakka TA, Rauramaa R, Boehnke M, Cucca F, Uda M, Schlessinger D, Nagaraja R, Abecasis GR (2011). Gibson, Greg (ed.). "Fine mapping of five loci associated with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol detects variants that double the explained heritability". PLoS Genet. 7 (7): e1002198. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002198. PMC 3145627. PMID 21829380. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  20. ^ Hindorff LA, Sethupathy P, Junkins HA, Ramos EM, Mehta JP, Collins FS, Manolio TA (2009). "Potential etiologic and functional implications of genome-wide association loci for human diseases and traits". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106 (23): 9362–7. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903103106. PMC 2687147. PMID 19474294. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  21. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1126/science.1110359, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1126/science.1110359 instead.
  22. ^ Fridkis-Hareli M, Storek M, Mazsaroff I, Risitano AM, Lundberg AS, Horvath CJ, Holers VM (2011). "Design and development of TT30, a novel C3d-targeted C3/C5 convertase inhibitor for treatment of human complement alternative pathway–mediated diseases". Blood. 118 (17): 4705–13. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-06-359646. PMC 3208285. PMID 21860027. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  23. ^ "Largest ever study of genetics of common diseases published today" (Press release). Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. 6 June 2007. Retrieved 19 June 2008.
  24. ^ Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium, Burton PR, Clayton DG, Cardon LR; et al. (2007). "Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls". Nature. 447 (7145): 661–78. doi:10.1038/nature05911. PMC 2719288. PMID 17554300. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  25. ^ Ehret GB, Munroe PB, Rice KM; et al. (2011). "Genetic variants in novel pathways influence blood pressure and cardiovascular disease risk". Nature. 478 (7367): 103–9. doi:10.1038/nature10405. PMC 3340926. PMID 21909115. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  26. ^ a b c Kathiresan S, Willer CJ, Peloso GM; et al. (2009). "Common variants at 30 loci contribute to polygenic dyslipidemia". Nat. Genet. 41 (1): 56–65. doi:10.1038/ng.291. PMC 2881676. PMID 19060906. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  27. ^ Strawbridge RJ, Dupuis J, Prokopenko I; et al. (2011). "Genome-Wide Association Identifies Nine Common Variants Associated With Fasting Proinsulin Levels and Provides New Insights Into the Pathophysiology of Type 2 Diabetes". Diabetes. 60 (10): 2624–34. doi:10.2337/db11-0415. PMC 3178302. PMID 21873549. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  28. ^ Danesh J, Pepys MB (2009). "C-reactive protein and coronary disease: is there a causal link?". Circulation. 120 (21): 2036–9. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.907212. PMID 19901186. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  29. ^ Ku CS, Loy EY, Pawitan Y, Chia KS (2010). "The pursuit of genome-wide association studies: where are we now?". J. Hum. Genet. 55 (4): 195–206. doi:10.1038/jhg.2010.19. PMID 20300123. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  30. ^ a b Maher B (2008). "Personal genomes: The case of the missing heritability". Nature. 456 (7218): 18–21. doi:10.1038/456018a. PMID 18987709. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  31. ^ Fareed M, Afzal M (2012). "Single nucleotide polymorphism in genome-wide association of human population: A tool for broad spectrum service". Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics: in press. doi:10.1016/j.ejmhg.2012.08.001. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  32. ^ Iadonato SP, Katze MG (2009). "Genomics: Hepatitis C virus gets personal". Nature. 461 (7262): 357–8. doi:10.1038/461357a. PMID 19759611. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)Closed access icon
  33. ^ Muehlschlegel JD, Liu KY, Perry TE, Fox AA, Collard CD, Shernan SK, Body SC (2010). "Chromosome 9p21 Variant Predicts Mortality after CABG Surgery". Circulation. 122 (11 Suppl): S60–5. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.924233. PMC 2943860. PMID 20837927. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  34. ^ Paynter NP, Chasman DI, Paré G, Buring JE, Cook NR, Miletich JP, Ridker PM (2010). "Association between a Literature-Based Genetic Risk Score and Cardiovascular Events in 19,313 Women". JAMA. 303 (7): 631–7. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.119. PMC 2845522. PMID 20159871. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  35. ^ a b Couzin-Frankel J (2010). "Major heart disease genes prove elusive". Science. 328 (5983): 1220–1. doi:10.1126/science.328.5983.1220. PMID 20522751. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)Closed access icon
  36. ^ Ge D, Fellay J, Thompson AJ, Simon JS, Shianna KV, Urban TJ, Heinzen EL, Qiu P, Bertelsen AH, Muir AJ, Sulkowski M, McHutchison JG, Goldstein DB (2009). "Genetic variation in IL28B predicts hepatitis C treatment-induced viral clearance". Nature. 461 (7262): 399–401. doi:10.1038/nature08309. PMID 19684573. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  37. ^ Thomas DL, Thio CL, Martin MP, Qi Y, Ge D, O'Huigin C, Kidd J, Kidd K, Khakoo SI, Alexander G, Goedert JJ, Kirk GD, Donfield SM, Rosen HR, Tobler LH, Busch MP, McHutchison JG, Goldstein DB, Carrington M (2009). "Genetic variation in IL28B and spontaneous clearance of hepatitis C virus". Nature. 461 (7265): 798–801. doi:10.1038/nature08463. PMC 3172006. PMID 19759533. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  38. ^ Folkersen L, van't Hooft F, Chernogubova E, Agardh HE, Hansson GK, Hedin U, Liska J, Syvänen AC, Paulsson-Berne G, Paulssson-Berne G, Franco-Cereceda A, Hamsten A, Gabrielsen A, Eriksson P (2010). "Association of genetic risk variants with expression of proximal genes identifies novel susceptibility genes for cardiovascular disease". Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 3 (4): 365–73. doi:10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.110.948935. PMID 20562444. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  39. ^ Bown MJ, Jones GT, Harrison SC; et al. (2011). "Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Is Associated with a Variant in Low-Density Lipoprotein Receptor-Related Protein 1". Am. J. Hum. Genet. 89 (5): 619–27. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.10.002. PMC 3213391. PMID 22055160. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  40. ^ Peden, John F; Hopewell, Jemma C; Saleheen, Danish; Chambers, John C; Hager, Jorg; Soranzo, Nicole; Collins, Rory; Danesh, John; Elliott, Paul (2011). "A genome-wide association study in Europeans and South Asians identifies five new loci for coronary artery disease". Nat. Genet. 43 (4): 339–44. doi:10.1038/ng.782. PMID 21378988. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)Closed access icon
  41. ^ Johnson T, Gaunt TR, Newhouse SJ; et al. (2011). "Blood Pressure Loci Identified with a Gene-Centric Array". Am J Hum Genet. 89 (6): 688–700. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.10.013. PMC 3234370. PMID 22100073. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  42. ^ Dubé JB, Johansen CT, Hegele RA (2011). "Sortilin: an unusual suspect in cholesterol metabolism: from GWAS identification to in vivo biochemical analyses, sortilin has been identified as a novel mediator of human lipoprotein metabolism". BioEssays. 33 (6): 430–7. doi:10.1002/bies.201100003. PMID 21462369. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Closed access icon
  43. ^ Bauer RC, Stylianou IM, Rader DJ (2011). "Functional validation of new pathways in lipoprotein metabolism identified by human genetics". Curr. Opin. Lipidol. 22 (2): 123–8. doi:10.1097/MOL.0b013e32834469b3. PMID 21311327. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Closed access icon
  44. ^ "Size matters, and other lessons from medical genetics". Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  45. ^ Sebastiani P, Solovieff N, Puca A, Hartley SW, Melista E, Andersen S, Dworkis DA, Wilk JB, Myers RH, Steinberg MH, Montano M, Baldwin CT, Perls TT (2010). "Genetic signatures of exceptional longevity in humans". Science. 2010. doi:10.1126/science.1190532. PMID 20595579. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) (Retracted)Closed access icon
  46. ^ MacArthur, Daniel. "Serious flaws revealed in "longevity genes" study". Wired. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  47. ^ Sebastiani P, Solovieff N, Puca A, Hartley SW, Melista E, Andersen S, Dworkis DA, Wilk JB, Myers RH, Steinberg MH, Montano M, Baldwin CT, Perls TT (2011). "Retraction". Science. 333 (6041): 404. doi:10.1126/science.333.6041.404-a. PMID 21778381. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Closed access icon
  48. ^ Visscher PM, Goddard ME, Derks EM, Wray NR (2011). "Evidence-based psychiatric genetics, AKA the false dichotomy between common and rare variant hypotheses". Mol Psychiatry. 17 (5): 474–85. doi:10.1038/mp.2011.65. PMID 21670730. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Closed access icon

Reviews

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Genome-wide_association_study&oldid=533910732"