↓ Skip to main content

Comprehensive evaluation of disease- and trait-specific enrichment for eight functional elements among GWAS-identified variants

Overview of attention for article published in Human Genetics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Comprehensive evaluation of disease- and trait-specific enrichment for eight functional elements among GWAS-identified variants
Published in
Human Genetics, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00439-017-1815-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina A. Markunas, Eric O. Johnson, Dana B. Hancock

Abstract

Genome-wide association study (GWAS)-identified variants are enriched for functional elements. However, we have limited knowledge of how functional enrichment may differ by disease/trait and tissue type. We tested a broad set of eight functional elements for enrichment among GWAS-identified SNPs (p < 5×10(-8)) from the NHGRI-EBI Catalog across seven disease/trait categories: cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune disease, psychiatric disease, neurological disease, and anthropometric traits. SNPs were annotated using HaploReg for the eight functional elements across any tissue: DNase sites, expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL), sequence conservation, enhancers, promoters, missense variants, sequence motifs, and protein binding sites. In addition, tissue-specific annotations were considered for brain vs. blood. Disease/trait SNPs were compared to a control set of 4809 SNPs matched to the GWAS SNPs (N = 1639) on allele frequency, gene density, distance to nearest gene, and linkage disequilibrium at ~3:1 ratio. Enrichment analyses were conducted using logistic regression, with Bonferroni correction. Overall, a significant enrichment was observed for all functional elements, except sequence motifs. Missense SNPs showed the strongest magnitude of enrichment. eQTLs were the only functional element significantly enriched across all diseases/traits. Magnitudes of enrichment were generally similar across diseases/traits, where enrichment was statistically significant. Blood vs. brain tissue effects on enrichment were dependent on disease/trait and functional element (e.g., cardiovascular disease: eQTLs P TissueDifference = 1.28 × 10(-6) vs. enhancers P TissueDifference = 0.94). Identifying disease/trait-relevant functional elements and tissue types could provide new insight into the underlying biology, by guiding a priori GWAS analyses (e.g., brain enhancer elements for psychiatric disease) or facilitating post hoc interpretation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 6 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Materials Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,897,310
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Human Genetics
#2,649
of 2,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,322
of 316,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genetics
#14
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,957 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.