OBJECTIVE: We set out to test the hypothesis that pharmacometabolomic data could be efficiently merged with pharmacogenomic data by single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) imputation of metabolomic-derived pathway data on a 'scaffolding' of genome-wide association (GWAS) SNP data to broaden and accelerate 'pharmacometabolomics-informed pharmacogenomic' studies by eliminating the need for initial genotyping and by making broader SNP association testing possible. METHODS: We previously genotyped 131 tag SNPs for six genes encoding enzymes in the glycine synthesis and degradation pathway using DNA from 529 depressed patients treated with citalopram/escitalopram to pursue a glycine metabolomics 'signal' associated with selective serotonine reuptake inhibitor response. We identified a significant SNP in the glycine dehydrogenase gene. Subsequently, GWAS SNP data were generated for the same patients. In this study, we compared SNP imputation within 200 kb of these same six genes with the results of the previous tag SNP strategy as a rapid strategy for merging pharmacometabolomic and pharmacogenomic data. RESULTS: Imputed genotype data provided greater coverage and higher resolution than did tag SNP genotyping, with a higher average genotype concordance between genotyped and imputed SNP data for '1000 Genomes' (96.4%) than HapMap 2 (93.2%) imputation. Many low P-value SNPs with novel locations within genes were observed for imputed compared with tag SNPs, thus altering the focus for subsequent functional genomic studies. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the use of GWAS data to impute SNPs for genes in pathways identified by other 'omics' approaches makes it possible to rapidly and cost efficiently identify SNP markers to 'broaden' and accelerate pharmacogenomic studies.
OBJECTIVE: We set out to test the hypothesis that pharmacometabolomic data could be efficiently merged with pharmacogenomic data by single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) imputation of metabolomic-derived pathway data on a 'scaffolding' of genome-wide association (GWAS) SNP data to broaden and accelerate 'pharmacometabolomics-informed pharmacogenomic' studies by eliminating the need for initial genotyping and by making broader SNP association testing possible. METHODS: We previously genotyped 131 tag SNPs for six genes encoding enzymes in the glycine synthesis and degradation pathway using DNA from 529 depressedpatients treated with citalopram/escitalopram to pursue a glycine metabolomics 'signal' associated with selective serotonine reuptake inhibitor response. We identified a significant SNP in the glycine dehydrogenase gene. Subsequently, GWAS SNP data were generated for the same patients. In this study, we compared SNP imputation within 200 kb of these same six genes with the results of the previous tag SNP strategy as a rapid strategy for merging pharmacometabolomic and pharmacogenomic data. RESULTS: Imputed genotype data provided greater coverage and higher resolution than did tag SNP genotyping, with a higher average genotype concordance between genotyped and imputed SNP data for '1000 Genomes' (96.4%) than HapMap 2 (93.2%) imputation. Many low P-value SNPs with novel locations within genes were observed for imputed compared with tag SNPs, thus altering the focus for subsequent functional genomic studies. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the use of GWAS data to impute SNPs for genes in pathways identified by other 'omics' approaches makes it possible to rapidly and cost efficiently identify SNP markers to 'broaden' and accelerate pharmacogenomic studies.
Authors: Alkes L Price; Nick J Patterson; Robert M Plenge; Michael E Weinblatt; Nancy A Shadick; David Reich Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-07-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Michael Nothnagel; David Ellinghaus; Stefan Schreiber; Michael Krawczak; Andre Franke Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Y Ji; S Hebbring; H Zhu; G D Jenkins; J Biernacka; K Snyder; M Drews; O Fiehn; Z Zeng; D Schaid; D A Mrazek; R Kaddurah-Daouk; R M Weinshilboum Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-11-24 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Gonçalo R Abecasis; David Altshuler; Adam Auton; Lisa D Brooks; Richard M Durbin; Richard A Gibbs; Matt E Hurles; Gil A McVean Journal: Nature Date: 2010-10-28 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Hicham M Ibrahim; Thomas J Carmody; Bruce Arnow; Daniel N Klein; John C Markowitz; Philip T Ninan; Susan Kornstein; Rachel Manber; Michael E Thase; James H Kocsis; Martin B Keller Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2003-09-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Sven Michel; Liming Liang; Martin Depner; Norman Klopp; Andreas Ruether; Ashish Kumar; Michaela Schedel; Christian Vogelberg; Erika von Mutius; Andrea von Berg; Albrecht Bufe; Ernst Rietschel; Andrea Heinzmann; Otto Laub; Burkhard Simma; Thomas Frischer; Jon Genuneit; Ivo G Gut; Stefan Schreiber; Mark Lathrop; Thomas Illig; Michael Kabesch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Joanna M Biernacka; Rui Tang; Jia Li; Shannon K McDonnell; Kari G Rabe; Jason P Sinnwell; David N Rider; Mariza de Andrade; Ellen L Goode; Brooke L Fridley Journal: BMC Proc Date: 2009-12-15
Authors: Qian Zhu; Robert R Freimuth; Zonghui Lian; Scott Bauer; Jyotishman Pathak; Cui Tao; Matthew J Durski; Christopher G Chute Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: A Villaseñor; A Ramamoorthy; M Silva dos Santos; M P Lorenzo; G Laje; C Zarate; C Barbas; I W Wainer Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Bharathi S Gadad; Manish K Jha; Andrew Czysz; Jennifer L Furman; Taryn L Mayes; Michael P Emslie; Madhukar H Trivedi Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Nicholas J W Rattray; Georgia Charkoftaki; Zahra Rattray; James E Hansen; Vasilis Vasiliou; Caroline H Johnson Journal: Curr Pharmacol Rep Date: 2017-04-07
Authors: J P Lewis; L M Yerges-Armstrong; S Ellero-Simatos; A Georgiades; R Kaddurah-Daouk; T Hankemeier Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2013-07-26 Impact factor: 6.875