4.6 Review

A genetic schizophrenia-susceptibility region located between the ANKK1 and DRD2 genes

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2010.02.003

关键词

ANKK1; DRD2; Genetic study; Phylogeny; Schizophrenia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The gene coding for the D2 dopamine receptor (DRD2) is considered to be one of the most pertinent candidate genes in schizophrenia. However, genetic studies have yielded conflicting results whereas the promising TaqIA variant/rs1800497 has been mapped in a novel gene, ANKK1. Methods: We investigated eleven single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) spanning the DRD2 and ANKK1 genes, using both a case-control association study comparing 144 independent patients to 142 matched healthy subjects, and a transmission disequilibrium test in 108 trios. This classical genetic study was coupled with a cladistic phylogeny-based association test of human variants, and with an interspecies evolution study of ANKK1. Results: Case-control study, followed by a 108 trios family-based association analysis for replication, revealed an association between schizophrenia and the ANKK1 rs1800497 (p = 0.01, Odds Ratio = 1.5, 95% Confidence Interval = 1.1-2.2), and the intergenic rs2242592 (p = 2. 10(-4), OR = 1.8, 95%CI = 1.3-2.5). A significant SNP-SNP interaction was also found (p<10(-5), OR = 2.0, 95%CI = 1.6-2.5). The phylogeny-based association test also identified an association between both these polymorphisms and schizophrenia. Finally, interspecies comparison of the sequences from chimpanzee, orangutan, rhesus macaque and human species suggested specific involvement of ANKK1 in the human lineage. Conclusions: Intergenic rs2242592 appears to be involved in the genetic vulnerability to schizophrenia, whereas the ANKK1 rs1800497 appears to have a modifying rather than causative effect. Finally; ANKK1 may be a specific human lineage-trait involved in a specific human disease, schizophrenia. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据