| Literature DB >> 24047820 |
Beate St Pourcain1, Andrew J O Whitehouse, Wei Q Ang, Nicole M Warrington, Joseph T Glessner, Kai Wang, Nicholas J Timpson, David M Evans, John P Kemp, Susan M Ring, Wendy L McArdle, Jean Golding, Hakon Hakonarson, Craig E Pennell, George Davey Smith.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social communication difficulties represent an autistic trait that is highly heritable and persistent during the course of development. However, little is known about the underlying genetic architecture of this phenotype.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24047820 PMCID: PMC3853437 DOI: 10.1186/2040-2392-4-34
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Autism Impact factor: 7.509
Item composition of the short pragmatic composite score
| 1 | Tends to talk about subjects that are off topic | Conversation with child tends to go off in unexpected directions |
| 2 | Does not have the idea of the need to take turns in conversation | Child talks too much |
| 3 | Changes subject indiscriminately | Child will suddenly change topic of conversation |
| 4 | Does not introduce subjects and topics appropriately | Child uses terms like he or it without making it clear what talking about |
| 5 | Has difficult expressing ideas coherently in a sentence | Sometimes hard to make sense of what child says as it seems illogical/disconnected |
| 6 | Has difficulty understanding whole sentences (that is, instructions, directions, general conversation) | Child takes in just one or two words in a sentence so often misinterprets what was said |
a – Selected from a 10-item broader autism questionnaire [35] in RAINE.
b – Selected from 38 items representing the pragmatic composite summary scale of the Children’s Communication Checklist [33].
Study characteristics
| | | | | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALSPAC | Discovery | 5,584 | 50.3 | 1.99 (1.88) | 0; 12 | 9.64 (0.12) | 9.50; 11.00 |
| RAINE | Replication | 1,364 | 51.8 | 0.90 (1.69) | 0; 11 | 10.58 (0.20) | 9.42; 12.37 |
a – Samples with genotypic and phenotypic data; SPC, Short pragmatic composite.
Figure 1Quantile-quantile plot for the genome-wide analysis of social communication difficulties in ALSPAC. The plot is based on genomic-control corrected P-values. Black circles depict the observed association signals, the white diagonal line represents the distribution of signals under the null hypothesis and the shaded area corresponds to the 95% confidence interval. A deviation of the observed from the expected distribution of signals is visible. λ, Genomic-control factor.
Association results for the lead signals from the discovery analysis
| | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs761490 | 1p32.3 | C,G | 0.24 | 0.096 (0.022) | 9.7E-06 | 0.23 | −0.051 (0.090) | 0.57 | 0.088 (0.021) | 3.0E-05 | 0.11 | |
| rs12115663 | 9p22.3 | C,A | 0.86 | 0.13 (0.027) | 4.1E-06 | 0.87 | −0.12 (0.10) | 0.23 | 0.11 (0.026) | 3.6E-05 | 0.018 | |
| rs1834180 | 10q25.1 | A,G | intergenic | 0.68 | 0.10 (0.020) | 3.3E-07 | 0.70 | 0.033 (0.079) | 0.68 | 0.097 (0.019) | 4.6E-07 | 0.40 |
| rs11625667 | 14q24.3 | G,A | 0.36 | 0.085 (0.018) | 4.3E-06 | 0.35 | −0.049 (0.076) | 0.52 | 0.077 (0.018) | 1.7E-05 | 0.086 | |
| rs4218 | 15q22.2 | G,C | 0.29 | 0.11 (0.020) | 2.6E-08 | 0.31 | −0.027 (0.080) | 0.74 | 0.10 (0.019) | 1.0E-07 | 0.096 | |
a - Genomic-control corrected.
Results are presented for the most significant signals (Genomic-control corrected P ≤1E-05) from independent loci during the discovery stage of the analysis. Regression estimates were obtained using Quasi-Poisson regression. All SNPs were imputed and had an imputation quality of 0.90
Figure 2Association plot for the association between social communication problems and common variation at 6p22.1. a). Chromosome ideogram for chromosome 6. b). Regional association plot for rs9257616 on chromosome 6p22.1. Directly genotyped and imputed variants are depicted by filled circles according to their GWAS P-value (−log10 P-value) and genomic position (NCBI Build 36). The local LD structure is reflected by HapMap CEU (Rel 22) recombination rates (blue line). The LD (r2) between the lead variant and surrounding SNPs is indicated by the colour code. c). Detailed genomic region near rs9257616 on chromosome 6p22.1 with variants in LD (r2 >0.3) including non-coding functional (Regulome score ≤2) and missense variation. The LD (r2) between the lead variant and surrounding SNPs is indicated by the colour code (0 (white)-1(black)). The local LD structure is reflected by HapMap CEU (Rel 22) r2 –based haplotype blocks. GWAS, genome-wide association studies; LD, linkage disequilibrium; SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms.
Figure 3Association plot for the association between social communication problems and common variation at 14q22.1. a). Chromosome ideogram for chromosome 14. b). Regional association plot for rs2352908 on chromosome 14q22.1. Directly genotyped and imputed variants are depicted by filled circles according to their GWAS P-value (−log10 P-value) and genomic position (NCBI Build 36). The local LD structure is reflected by HapMap CEU (Rel 22) recombination rates (blue line). The LD (r2) between the lead variant and surrounding SNPs is indicated by the colour code. c). Detailed genomic region near rs2352908 on chromosome 14q22.1 with variants in LD (r2 >0.3) including non-coding functional variation (Regulome score ≤2). The LD (r2) between the lead variant and surrounding SNPs is indicated by the colour code (0 (white)-1(black)). The local LD structure is reflected by HapMap CEU (Rel 22) r2 –based haplotype blocks. GWAS, genome-wide association studies; LD, linkage disequilibrium; SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms.
Figure 4Estimate of the proportion of genetic variance in social communication difficulties explained by each chromosome. Numbers reflect individual chromosomes; the blue line indicates the linear regression of chromosome length on the proportion of variation explained (adjusted regression R2 = 0.12, P = 0.06); confidence intervals are indicated in grey.