| Literature DB >> 28264060 |
Tiger Zhou1, Emmanuelle Souzeau1, Shiwani Sharma1, John Landers1, Richard Mills1, Ivan Goldberg2,3, Paul R Healey2,4, Stuart Graham2, Alex W Hewitt5, David A Mackey6, Anna Galanopoulos7, Robert J Casson7, Jonathan B Ruddle8, Jonathan Ellis9, Paul Leo9, Matthew A Brown9, Stuart MacGregor10, David J Lynn11,12, Kathryn P Burdon1,5, Jamie E Craig1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify biological processes associated with POAG and its subtypes, high-tension (HTG) and normal-tension glaucoma (NTG), by analyzing rare potentially damaging genetic variants.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28264060 PMCID: PMC5338784 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172427
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Experimental flowchart.
POAG = primary open-angle glaucoma, HTG = high-tension glaucoma, NTG = normal-tension glaucoma, LoF = loss of function.
Fig 2Flowchart showing network analysis using InnateDB using High-Tension Glaucoma (HTG) enriched genes as an example.
Clinical detail of POAG participants.
The Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess statistical significance. HTG = high-tension glaucoma, NTG = normal-tension glaucoma, IOP = intraocular pressure, MD = mean deviation, CDR = cup-to-disc ratio, CCT = central corneal thickness.
| Group | HTG | NTG | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||
| IOP (mmHg) | 31.5 | 0.74 | 18.1 | 0.35 | - |
| MD (dB) | -18.16 | 0.84 | -16.35 | 1.05 | 0.183 |
| CDR | 0.901 | 0.009 | 0.894 | 0.014 | 0.631 |
| CCT (micron) | 525.0 | 4.15 | 516.5 | 4.97 | 0.088 |
| Age at diagnosis (Years) | 42.5 | 0.89 | 47.9 | 1.29 | <0.001 |
Mean number of variants remaining at each stage of post-sequencing filtering.
| All called variants per participant | ||
|---|---|---|
| Cases | Controls | |
| Single nucleotide variants | 66318 | 66181 |
| Indels | 6057 | 6017 |
| Single nucleotide variants | 19591 | 19632 |
| Indels | 466 | 462 |
| Predicted pathogenic model | 75.3 | 75.7 |
| Canonical loss of function model | 9.0 | 8.9 |
Fig 3Venn diagram showing number of genes enriched in high-tension glaucoma, normal-tension glaucoma and all primary open-angle glaucoma cohorts compared with each of the control cohorts (local, AOGC and ExAC).
Significantly enriched Gene Ontology and biological pathways in POAG and its sub-types.
LoF = Loss of function, OR = Odds ratio, CI = confidence interval.
| Biological mechanism | P-value | Corrected p-value | Total genes in pathway | OR(95% CI) | Enriched genes (cases vs controls) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camera-type eye development | 1.40×10−7 | 3.28×10−4 | 67 | 10.22(4.87–21.43) | |
| Negative regulation of cardiac muscle cell apoptotic process | 1.27×10−7 | 0.015 | 8 | 15.03 (2.89–78.04) | |
| IRE1alpha activates chaperones | 7.72×10−5 | 0.013 | 50 | 76.84 (9.53–619.91) | |
| XBP1(S) activates chaperone genes | 5.90×10−5 | 0.019 | 48 | 76.84 (9.53–619.91) | |
| Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) | 2.92×10−4 | 0.032 | 81 | 87.21(10.95–694.66) | |
| Ion channel transport | 1.05×10−4 | 0.027 | 169 | 17.93 (7.30–44.03) | |
Fig 4Major sub-networks/modules enriched in the high-tension glaucoma cohort.
A: module 1 genes were significantly enriched for the EGFR1 pathway. B: module 2 genes were significantly enriched for the Class I MHC mediated antigen processing & presentation pathway. C: module 3 genes were significantly enriched for the cell cycle pathway.
Fig 5Major sub-networks/modules enriched in normal-tension glaucoma cohort.
A: module 1 genes were not significantly enriched for any known biological pathways. B: module 2 genes were significantly enriched for the EGFR1 and cell cycle pathways.