4.5 Article

Hypertension and genome-wide association studies: combining high fidelity phenotyping and hypercontrols

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 26, Issue 7, Pages 1275-1281

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282ff634f

Keywords

genetics; genome-wide association; hypertension; polymorphism

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [G0400874] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. MRC [G0400874] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. British Heart Foundation [BHFPG/02/128, FS/05/095/19937] Funding Source: Medline
  4. Medical Research Council [G0400874] Funding Source: Medline
  5. Wellcome Trust [066780/2/012] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Among the common complex diseases, hypertension has been particularly unlucky in the recent surge of positive results from genome-wide association studies. We summarize the evidence that would support continuing the effort in the hunt for a genetic basis for hypertension. The problems facing the genetic studies for hypertension are not unique, but phenotypic characterization, heterogeneity and high prevalence make it a special case requiring a more individualized approach. We argue that, even in the presence of a strong environmental component to hypertension risk, the common disease/common variant model is relevant for hypertension and discuss the issues involved in designing a genome-wide association study for hypertension. It is likely that the individual odds ratios for disease variants will be less than 1.3 and, although individually these effect sizes are minor, the combination of even a few such common polymorphisms can have substantial population attributable risks. The identification of hypertension gene variants should provide new insight into the disease susceptibility, progression and severity. This will lead to the identification of potential targets for lifestyle and pharmacological interventions, with the ultimate goal of improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available