| Literature DB >> 26686553 |
Eric Jorgenson1, Nadja Makki2,3, Ling Shen1, David C Chen4, Chao Tian5, Walter L Eckalbar2,3, David Hinds5, Nadav Ahituv2,3, Andrew Avins1.
Abstract
Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed operations in the world, yet little is known about the genetic mechanisms that predispose individuals to develop inguinal hernias. We perform a genome-wide association analysis of surgically confirmed inguinal hernias in 72,805 subjects (5,295 cases and 67,510 controls) and confirm top associations in an independent cohort of 92,444 subjects with self-reported hernia repair surgeries (9,701 cases and 82,743 controls). We identify four novel inguinal hernia susceptibility loci in the regions of EFEMP1, WT1, EBF2 and ADAMTS6. Moreover, we observe expression of all four genes in mouse connective tissue and network analyses show an important role for two of these genes (EFEMP1 and WT1) in connective tissue maintenance/homoeostasis. Our findings provide insight into the aetiology of hernia development and highlight genetic pathways for studies of hernia development and its treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26686553 PMCID: PMC4703831 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms10130
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1Manhattan plot of GWAS findings in the GERA discovery cohort.
Four novel inguinal hernia risk loci with genome-wide significant associations were identified in the regions of EFEMP1 (chromosome 2), ADAMTS6 (chromosome 5), EBF2 (chromosome 8) and WT1 (chromosome 11). The dotted red line represents a significance threshold of P=5.0 × 10-8.
SNP associations reaching genome-wide significance in the combined analysis of discovery and replication cohorts.
| rs2009262 | 2 | 56,012,214 | T | 0.78 | 1.23 (1.17–1.30) | 3.66 × 10−15 | 0.78 | 1.10 (1.06–1.15) | 3.65 × 10−06 | 1.15 (1.11–1.19) | 1.45 × 10−17 | |
| rs370763 | 5 | 64,355,060 | A | 0.65 | 1.14 (1.09–1.19) | 9.70 × 10−09 | 0.67 | 1.06 (1.02–1.09) | 3.02 × 10−03 | 1.09 (1.06–1.12) | 3.73 × 10−9 | |
| rs6991952 | 8 | 25,707,412 | G | 0.43 | 1.14 (1.10–1.19) | 1.17 × 10−10 | 0.43 | 1.08 (1.05–1.12) | 2.04 × 10−06 | 1.11 (1.08–1.14) | 6.68 × 10−15 | |
| rs3809060 | 11 | 32,458,807 | G | 0.62 | 1.18 (1.13–1.23) | 4.69 × 10−14 | 0.63 | 1.07 (1.03–1.10) | 1.69 × 10−04 | 1.11 (1.08–1.14) | 3.69 × 10−14 | |
Chr., chromosome; CI, confidence interval; RAF, risk allele frequency; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism.
Sex-stratified analysis of direct and indirect inguinal hernia among GERA discovery cohort.
| rs2009262 | Direct | 1.25 (1.16–1.36) | 2.31 × 10−8 | 1.42 (1.04–1.94) | 0.03 | 1.26 (1.17–1.36) | 2.81 × 10−9 | 1.26 (1.17–1.36) | 2.81 × 10−9 | 0 | 0.46 |
| Indirect | 1.21 (1.13–1.31) | 4.48 × 10−7 | 1.51 (1.18–1.93) | 0.001 | 1.24 (1.15–1.33) | 8.48 × 10−9 | 1.31 (1.07–1.60) | 0.009 | 62.4 | 0.1 | |
| rs370763 | Direct | 1.14 (1.06–1.22) | 1.60 × 10−4 | 1.22 (0.94–1.58) | 0.133 | 1.14 (1.07–1.22) | 6.38 × 10−5 | 1.14 (1.07–1.22) | 6.38 × 10−5 | 0 | 0.65 |
| Indirect | 1.15 (1.08–1.23) | 2.86 × 10−5 | 1.10 (0.91–1.34) | 0.332 | 1.14 (1.08–1.22) | 2.28 × 10−5 | 1.14 (1.08–1.22) | 2.28 × 10−5 | 0 | 0.66 | |
| rs6991952 | Direct | 1.21 (1.14–1.29) | 8.95 × 10−10 | 1.03 (0.81–1.30) | 0.814 | 1.20 (1.13–1.28) | 2.38 × 10−9 | 1.16 (1.01–1.34) | 0.044 | 46 | 0.17 |
| Indirect | 1.14 (1.08–1.21) | 1.17 × 10−5 | 1.07 (0.89–1.28) | 0.461 | 1.14 (1.07–1.20) | 1.20 × 10−5 | 1.14 (1.07–1.20) | 1.20 × 10−5 | 0 | 0.46 | |
| rs3809060 | Direct | 1.21 (1.13–1.29) | 2.71 × 10−8 | 1.44 (1.11–1.86) | 0.006 | 1.22 (1.14–1.30) | 1.55 × 10−9 | 1.26 (1.09–1.46) | 0.003 | 44.7 | 0.18 |
| Indirect | 1.17 (1.09–1.24) | 2.16 × 10−6 | 1.55 (1.26–1.89) | 2.41 × 10−5 | 1.20 (1.13–1.27) | 8.14 × 10−9 | 1.32 (1.00–1.74) | 0.051 | 85.9 | 0.01 | |
CI, confidence interval; GERA, Genetic Epidemiology Research in Adult Health and Aging; I2, heterogeneity index; ORF, odds ratio from fixed effects model; ORR, odds ratio from random effects model; PHet, P value for heterogeneity from Cochran's Q test; PF, P value from fixed effects model; PR, P value from random effects model; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism.
Figure 2Expression analysis of Efemp1, Wt1, Ebf2 and Adamts6 by qRT-PCR (a) and RNA-seq (b).
Efemp1 is expressed at a high level, Wt1 at a moderate level and Ebf2 and Adamts6 at low levels in mouse connective tissue compared to a connective tissue expressed gene Col12a1 (positive control) and Oct4 that is not expressed in this tissue (negative control). Data are represented as mean±s.d. for the qRT-PCR and ±s.e.m. for the RNA-seq (n=12). For qRT-PCR three samples were analysed in three replicates of each reaction and relative expression levels calculated by the ΔCT method. For RNA-seq, three replicates were analysed and normalized gene expression values, FPKM, were obtained for each replicate using Cufflinks2.
Figure 3Ingenuity Pathway Analysis outlines potential regulatory networks around EFEMP1 and WT1.
Network Analysis for EFEMP1 and WT1 was carried out using the RNA-seq FPKM>30 gene list (see Methods section). WT1 regulates many extracellular matrix genes, including MMP2 (matrix metalloproteinase-2) and CTGF (connective tissue growth factor). EFEMP1 directly interacts with ELASTIN, a component of elastic fibres in the ECM. TIMP3 (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-3), which is activated by WT1 and interacts with EFEMP1 and was found to connect between the two networks.