4.5 Article

Genome-wide association study identifies loci on 12q24 and 13q32 associated with Tetralogy of Fallot

Journal

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
Volume 22, Issue 7, Pages 1473-1481

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/dds552

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research, through the Northumberland, Tyne and Wear CLRN
  2. British Heart Foundation
  3. European Community [HEALTH-F2-2008-223040, HEALTH-F2-2008-201865 GEFOS, HEALTH-F4-2007-201413 ENGAGE]
  4. Wellcome Trust [087436, 085475]
  5. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
  6. Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation
  7. McLaughlin Centre
  8. Labatt Family Heart Centre
  9. Canadian Foundation for Innovation
  10. BBSRC [G20234]
  11. National Eye Institute via an NIH/CIDR genotyping project (
  12. British Heart Foundation [RG/07/010/23676, RG/10/17/28553, PG/07/045/22690, RG/13/10/30376] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted a genome-wide association study to search for risk alleles associated with Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), using a northern European discovery set of 835 cases and 5159 controls. A region on chromosome 12q24 was associated (P 1.4 10(7)) and replicated convincingly (P 3.9 10(5)) in 798 cases and 2931 controls [per allele odds ratio (OR) 1.27 in replication cohort, P 7.7 10(11) in combined populations]. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in the glypican 5 gene on chromosome 13q32 were also associated (P 1.7 10(7)) and replicated convincingly (P 1.2 10(5)) in 789 cases and 2927 controls (per allele OR 1.31 in replication cohort, P 3.03 10(11) in combined populations). Four additional regions on chromosomes 10, 15 and 16 showed suggestive association accompanied by nominal replication. This study, the first genome-wide association study of a congenital heart malformation phenotype, provides evidence that common genetic variation influences the risk of TOF.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available