4.6 Article

Loci with genome-wide associations with schizophrenia in the Han Chinese population

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 207, 期 6, 页码 490-494

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.150490

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology
  3. Ministry of Education of China
  4. Shanghai Municipal Science & Technology Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background A large schizophrenia genome-wide association study (GWAS) and a subsequent extensive replication study of individuals of European ancestry identified eight new loci with genome-wide significance and suggested that the MIR137-mediated pathway plays a role in the predisposition for schizophrenia. Aims To validate the above findings in a Han Chinese population. Method We analysed the single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the newly identified schizophrenia candidate loci and predicted MIR137 target genes based on our published Han. Chinese populations (BIOX) GWAS data. We then analysed 18 SNPs from the candidate regions in an independent cohort that consisted of 3585 patients with schizophrenia and 5496 controls of Han Chinese ancestry. Results We replicated the associations of five markers (P<0.05), including three that were located in the predicted MIR137 target genes. Two loci (ITIH3/4: rs2239547, P = 1.17 x 10(-10) and CALN1: rs2944829, P=9.97 x 10(-9)) exhibited genome-wide significance in the Han Chinese population. Conclusions The ITIH3/4 locus has been reported to be of genome-wide significance in the European population. The successful replication of this finding in a different ethnic group provides stronger evidence for the association between schizophrenia and ITIH3/4. We detected the first genome-wide significant association of schizophrenia with CALN1, which is a predicted target of MIR137, and thus provide new evidence for the associations between MIR137 targets and schizophrenia. Copyright and usage (C) The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2015.

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