4.7 Review

Genetics of multiple sclerosis: lessons from polygenicity

期刊

LANCET NEUROLOGY
卷 21, 期 9, 页码 830-842

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large-scale mapping studies have identified 236 independent genetic variants associated with an increased risk of multiple sclerosis, providing crucial biological insights into the disease's causes and mechanisms. These findings have important implications for understanding the epidemiology of multiple sclerosis and guiding risk assessment and prognosis.
Large-scale mapping studies have identified 236 independent genetic variants associated with an increased risk of multiple sclerosis. However, none of these variants are found exclusively in patients with multiple sclerosis. They are located throughout the genome, including 32 independent variants in the MHC and one on the X chromosome. Most variants are non-coding and seem to act through cell-specific effects on gene expression and splicing. The likely functions of these variants implicate both adaptive and innate immune cells in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis, provide pivotal biological insight into the causes and mechanisms of multiple sclerosis, and some of the variants implicated in multiple sclerosis also mediate risk of other autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Genetics offers an approach to showing causality for environmental factors, through Mendelian randomisation. No single variant is necessary or sufficient to cause multiple sclerosis; instead, each increases total risk in an additive manner. This combined contribution from many genetic factors to disease risk, or polygenicity, has important consequences for how we interpret the epidemiology of multiple sclerosis and how we counsel patients on risk and prognosis. Ongoing efforts are focused on increasing cohort sizes, increasing diversity and detailed characterisation of study populations, and translating these associations into an understanding of the biology of multiple sclerosis.

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

4.7
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