↓ Skip to main content

Hypothesis-Based Analysis of Gene-Gene Interactions and Risk of Myocardial Infarction

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hypothesis-Based Analysis of Gene-Gene Interactions and Risk of Myocardial Infarction
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0041730
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gavin Lucas, Carla Lluís-Ganella, Isaac Subirana, Muntaser D. Musameh, Juan Ramon Gonzalez, Christopher P. Nelson, Mariano Sentí, Stephen M. Schwartz, David Siscovick, Christopher J. O’Donnell, Olle Melander, Veikko Salomaa, Shaun Purcell, David Altshuler, Nilesh J. Samani, Sekar Kathiresan, Roberto Elosua

Abstract

The genetic loci that have been found by genome-wide association studies to modulate risk of coronary heart disease explain only a fraction of its total variance, and gene-gene interactions have been proposed as a potential source of the remaining heritability. Given the potentially large testing burden, we sought to enrich our search space with real interactions by analyzing variants that may be more likely to interact on the basis of two distinct hypotheses: a biological hypothesis, under which MI risk is modulated by interactions between variants that are known to be relevant for its risk factors; and a statistical hypothesis, under which interacting variants individually show weak marginal association with MI. In a discovery sample of 2,967 cases of early-onset myocardial infarction (MI) and 3,075 controls from the MIGen study, we performed pair-wise SNP interaction testing using a logistic regression framework. Despite having reasonable power to detect interaction effects of plausible magnitudes, we observed no statistically significant evidence of interaction under these hypotheses, and no clear consistency between the top results in our discovery sample and those in a large validation sample of 1,766 cases of coronary heart disease and 2,938 controls from the Wellcome Trust Case-Control Consortium. Our results do not support the existence of strong interaction effects as a common risk factor for MI. Within the scope of the hypotheses we have explored, this study places a modest upper limit on the magnitude that epistatic risk effects are likely to have at the population level (odds ratio for MI risk 1.3-2.0, depending on allele frequency and interaction model).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 55 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 29%
Professor 6 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 20%
Computer Science 2 3%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 5 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 August 2012.
All research outputs
#3,728,847
of 25,468,708 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#48,719
of 221,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,872
of 179,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#761
of 4,102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,468,708 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 221,895 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 179,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.