4.6 Article

Human longevity: 25 genetic loci associated in 389,166 UK biobank participants

期刊

AGING-US
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 2504-2520

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.101334

关键词

longevity; GWAS; human; genetic; 1417

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [MR/M023095/1]
  2. National Institute on Aging, U.S. National Institutes of Health
  3. University of Connecticut Health Center
  4. National Institute on Aging [NIA U01AG009740, AG09775, AG21079, AG33285]
  5. Social Security Administration
  6. Vilas Estate Trust
  7. National Science Foundation
  8. Spencer Foundation
  9. Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin-Madison
  10. William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin
  11. MRC [MR/M023095/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  12. Medical Research Council [MR/M023095/1, MC_qA137853] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We undertook a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of parental longevity in European descent UK Biobank participants. For combined mothers' and fathers' attained age, 10 loci were associated (p<5*10(-8)), including 8 previously identified for traits including survival, Alzheimer's and cardiovascular disease. Of these, 4 were also associated with longest 10% survival (mother's age >= 90 years, father's >= 87 years), with 2 additional associations including MC2R intronic variants (coding for the adrenocorticotropic hormone receptor). Mother's age at death was associated with 3 additional loci (2 linked to autoimmune conditions), and 8 for fathers only. An attained age genetic risk score associated with parental survival in the US Health and Retirement Study and the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study and with having a centenarian parent (n=1,181) in UK Biobank. The results suggest that human longevity is highly polygenic with prominent roles for loci likely involved in cellular senescence and inflammation, plus lipid metabolism and cardiovascular conditions. There may also be gender specific routes to longevity.

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