4.3 Review

Adaptive genetic variation and heart disease risk

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN LIPIDOLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 116-122

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOL.0b013e3283378e42

Keywords

dyslipidemia; gene-environment interaction; obesity; positive selection

Funding

  1. US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service [58-1950-9-001]
  2. National Institutes of Health Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [U 01 HL72524]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review Obesity, dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease are complex and determined by both genetic and environmental factors and their inter-relationships. Many associations from genome-wide association studies and candidate gene approaches have described a multitude of polymorphisms associating with lipid and obesity phenotypes but identified genetic variants account for only a small fraction of phenotypic variation. Recent findings That many genotype-phenotype associations involve variants under positive selection and that those variants respond to environmental cues together suggest prominent roles for both genetic adaptation and their interactions with the environment. Adaptive genetic variations interacting with environment modulate disease susceptibility but the level to which those variants contribute to dyslipidemia and obesity and how environmental factors, especially diet, alter the genetic association is not yet completely known. Summary It is evident that genetic variants under positive selection make important contributions to obesity and heart disease risk. Advances in resequencing the entire human genome will enable accurate identification of adaptive variants. Considering interactions between environmental factors and genotypes will empower both genome-wide association studies and characterization of the relationship between positive selection and the obese and dyslipidemic conditions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available