INTRODUCTION: Genes play a well-documented role in determining normal cognitive function. This paper focuses on reviewing strategies for the identification of common genetic variation in genes that modulate normal and abnormal cognition with a genome-wide association scan (GWAS). GWASs make it possible to survey the entire genome to discover important but unanticipated genetic influences. METHODS: The use of a quantitative phenotype in combination with a GWAS provides many advantages over a case-control design, both in power and in physiological understanding of the underlying cognitive processes. We review the major features of this approach, and show how, using a General Linear Model method, the contribution of each Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) to the phenotype is determined, and adjustments then made for multiple tests. An example of the strategy is presented, in which fMRI measures of cortical inefficiency while performing a working memory task are used as the quantitative phenotype. We estimate power under different effect sizes (10-30%) and variations in allelic frequency for a Quantitative Trait (QT) (10-20%), and compare them to a case-control design with an Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.5, showing how a QT approach is superior to a traditional case-control. In the presented example, this method identifies putative susceptibility genes for schizophrenia which affect prefrontal efficiency and have functions related to cell migration, forebrain development and stress response. CONCLUSION: The use of QT as phenotypes provide increased statistical power over categorical association approaches and when combined with a GWAS creates a strategy for identification of unanticipated genes that modulate cognitive processes and cognitive disorders.
INTRODUCTION: Genes play a well-documented role in determining normal cognitive function. This paper focuses on reviewing strategies for the identification of common genetic variation in genes that modulate normal and abnormal cognition with a genome-wide association scan (GWAS). GWASs make it possible to survey the entire genome to discover important but unanticipated genetic influences. METHODS: The use of a quantitative phenotype in combination with a GWAS provides many advantages over a case-control design, both in power and in physiological understanding of the underlying cognitive processes. We review the major features of this approach, and show how, using a General Linear Model method, the contribution of each Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) to the phenotype is determined, and adjustments then made for multiple tests. An example of the strategy is presented, in which fMRI measures of cortical inefficiency while performing a working memory task are used as the quantitative phenotype. We estimate power under different effect sizes (10-30%) and variations in allelic frequency for a Quantitative Trait (QT) (10-20%), and compare them to a case-control design with an Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.5, showing how a QT approach is superior to a traditional case-control. In the presented example, this method identifies putative susceptibility genes for schizophrenia which affect prefrontal efficiency and have functions related to cell migration, forebrain development and stress response. CONCLUSION: The use of QT as phenotypes provide increased statistical power over categorical association approaches and when combined with a GWAS creates a strategy for identification of unanticipated genes that modulate cognitive processes and cognitive disorders.
Authors: Sagiv Shifman; Michal Bronstein; Meira Sternfeld; Anne Pisanté-Shalom; Efrat Lev-Lehman; Avraham Weizman; Ilya Reznik; Baruch Spivak; Nimrod Grisaru; Leon Karp; Richard Schiffer; Moshe Kotler; Rael D Strous; Marnina Swartz-Vanetik; Haim Y Knobler; Eilat Shinar; Jacques S Beckmann; Benjamin Yakir; Neil Risch; Naomi B Zak; Ariel Darvasi Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2002-10-25 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Sarah Ennis; Catherine Jomary; Robert Mullins; Angela Cree; Xiaoli Chen; Alex Macleod; Stephen Jones; Andrew Collins; Edwin Stone; Andrew Lotery Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-10-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Andrew J Saykin; Li Shen; Tatiana M Foroud; Steven G Potkin; Shanker Swaminathan; Sungeun Kim; Shannon L Risacher; Kwangsik Nho; Matthew J Huentelman; David W Craig; Paul M Thompson; Jason L Stein; Jason H Moore; Lindsay A Farrer; Robert C Green; Lars Bertram; Clifford R Jack; Michael W Weiner Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Derrek P Hibar; Jason L Stein; Omid Kohannim; Neda Jahanshad; Andrew J Saykin; Li Shen; Sungeun Kim; Nathan Pankratz; Tatiana Foroud; Matthew J Huentelman; Steven G Potkin; Clifford R Jack; Michael W Weiner; Arthur W Toga; Paul M Thompson Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2011-04-08 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Corey T McMillan; Jon B Toledo; Brian B Avants; Philip A Cook; Elisabeth M Wood; Eunran Suh; David J Irwin; John Powers; Christopher Olm; Lauren Elman; Leo McCluskey; Gerard D Schellenberg; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski; Vivianna M Van Deerlin; Murray Grossman Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2013-12-02 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Steven G Potkin; Guia Guffanti; Anita Lakatos; Jessica A Turner; Frithjof Kruggel; James H Fallon; Andrew J Saykin; Alessandro Orro; Sara Lupoli; Erika Salvi; Michael Weiner; Fabio Macciardi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lei Du; Tuo Zhang; Kefei Liu; Jingwen Yan; Xiaohui Yao; Shannon L Risacher; Andrew J Saykin; Junwei Han; Lei Guo; Li Shen Journal: Inf Process Med Imaging Date: 2017-05-23
Authors: Lei Du; Kefei Liu; Xiaohui Yao; Shannon L Risacher; Junwei Han; Andrew J Saykin; Lei Guo; Li Shen Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 8.545