4.1 Article

Mutational screening and association study of glutamate decarboxylase 1 as a candidate susceptibility gene for bipolar affective disorder and schizophrenia

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.b.30137

关键词

glutamate decarboxylase 1; bipolar affective disorder; schizophrenia; single nucleotide polymorphism; association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent evidence from postmortem studies suggests that GAD1 encoding the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) synthetic enzyme GAD67 is a functional candidate susceptibility gene for both bipolar affective disorder (BPAD) and schizophrenia. Previous studies suggest linkage between D2S326 near GAD1 and BPAD. We systematically screened GAD1 exons, flanking intronic sequences, and the promoter sequence for polymorphisms in 16 BPAD patients and five controls from Denmark. We identified eight single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) including two in the promoter sequence. An association study of SNPs covering GAD1 was performed in a Danish sample of 82 BPAD subjects and 120 controls and in a Scottish sample of 197 individuals with schizophrenia, 200 BPAD subjects and 199 controls. Linkage disequilibrium. (LD) and haplotype frequencies were estimated from genotype data from eight SNPs. Strong pairwise LD was observed among all pairs of neighboring markers. In the Danish sample, we found weak association between BPAD and two promoter SNPs spaced 1 kb apart. Furthermore, one, two, and three loci haplotype analysis showed weak association with BPAD in the Danish sample. The results from the association studies indicate that promoter variants are of importance for the Danish BPAD cases and we cannot reject the hypothesis of GAD1 as a functional candidate gene for BPAD. No association was observed between BPAD or schizophrenia and any of the investigated SNPs in the Scottish sample set. Thus the results obtained from the Scottish sample suggest that the GAD1 gene variants do not play a major role in the predisposition to schizophrenia. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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

4.1
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