4.8 Article

Rare variant analysis in eczema identifies exonic variants in DUSP1, NOTCH4 and SLC9A4

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26783-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL
  2. MRC [MC_PC_19009] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identified rare and common variants associated with eczema susceptibility through a meta-analysis, revealing promising therapeutic targets and genetic characteristics of the disease. Rare variants were linked to up-regulation of skin genes while common variants were related to immune cell function.
Previous genome-wide association studies revealed multiple common variants involved in eczema but the role of rare variants remains to be elucidated. Here, we investigate the role of rare variants in eczema susceptibility. We meta-analyze 21 study populations including 20,016 eczema cases and 380,433 controls. Rare variants are imputed with high accuracy using large population-based reference panels. We identify rare exonic variants in DUSP1, NOTCH4, and SLC9A4 to be associated with eczema. In DUSP1 and NOTCH4 missense variants are predicted to impact conserved functional domains. In addition, five novel common variants at SATB1-AS1/KCNH8, TRIB1/LINC00861, ZBTB1, TBX21/OSBPL7, and CSF2RB are discovered. While genes prioritized based on rare variants are significantly up-regulated in the skin, common variants point to immune cell function. Over 20% of the single nucleotide variant-based heritability is attributable to rare and low-frequency variants. The identified rare/low-frequency variants located in functional protein domains point to promising targets for novel therapeutic approaches to eczema. Genetic studies of eczema to date have mostly explored common genetic variation. Here, the authors perform a large meta-analysis for common and rare variants and discover 8 loci associated with eczema. Over 20% of the heritability of the condition is attributable to rare variants.

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

4.8
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