Literature DB >> 27576756

Concepts and Misconceptions about the Polygenic Additive Model Applied to Disease.

Peter M Visscher, Naomi R Wray.   

Abstract

It is nearly one hundred years, since R.A. Fisher published his now famous paper that started the field of quantitative genetics. That paper reconciled Mendelian genetics (as exemplified by Mendel's peas) and the biometrical approach to quantitative traits (as exemplified by the correlation and regression approaches from Galton and Pearson), by showing that a simple model of many genes of small effects, each following Mendel's laws of segregation and inheritance, plus environmental variation could account for the observed resemblance between relatives. In this review, we discuss a number of concepts and misconceptions about the assumptions and limitations of polygenic models of common diseases in human populations.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27576756     DOI: 10.1159/000446931

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Hered        ISSN: 0001-5652            Impact factor:   0.444


  8 in total

Review 1.  Missing heritability of complex diseases: case solved?

Authors:  Emmanuelle Génin
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 2.  Open problems in human trait genetics.

Authors:  Nadav Brandes; Omer Weissbrod; Michal Linial
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 17.906

3.  Associating complex traits with genetic variants: polygenic risk scores, pleiotropy and endophenotypes.

Authors:  Gene S Fisch
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 1.633

4.  Leveraging correlations between variants in polygenic risk scores to detect heterogeneity in GWAS cohorts.

Authors:  Jie Yuan; Henry Xing; Alexandre Louis Lamy; Todd Lencz; Itsik Pe'er
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 5.917

5.  Maternal pregnancy-related infections and autism spectrum disorder-the genetic perspective.

Authors:  Ron Nudel; Wesley K Thompson; Anders D Børglum; David M Hougaard; Preben B Mortensen; Thomas Werge; Merete Nordentoft; Michael E Benros
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 7.989

6.  Inequality in genetic cancer risk suggests bad genes rather than bad luck.

Authors:  Mats Julius Stensrud; Morten Valberg
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 7.  Validity of polygenic risk scores: are we measuring what we think we are?

Authors:  A Cecile J W Janssens
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 6.150

Review 8.  Addiction as a brain disease revised: why it still matters, and the need for consilience.

Authors:  Markus Heilig; James MacKillop; Diana Martinez; Jürgen Rehm; Lorenzo Leggio; Louk J M J Vanderschuren
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 7.853

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.