Jessica E Salvatore1,2, Jeanne E Savage2, Peter Barr1, Aaron R Wolen3, Fazil Aliev1,4, Eero Vuoksimaa5, Antti Latvala5, Lea Pulkkinen6, Richard J Rose7, Jaakko Kaprio5, Danielle M Dick1. 1. Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 2. Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 3. Center for Clinical and Translational Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 4. Faculty of Business, Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkey. 5. Institute for Molecular Medicine FIMM, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 6. Department of Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland. 7. Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Characterizing aggregate genetic risk for alcohol misuse and identifying variants involved in gene-by-environment (G × E) interaction effects has so far been a major challenge. We hypothesized that functional genomic information could be used to enhance detection of polygenic signal underlying alcohol misuse and to prioritize identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) most likely to exhibit G × E effects. METHODS: We examined these questions in the young adult FinnTwin12 sample (n = 1,170). We used genomewide association estimates from an independent sample to derive 2 types of polygenic scores for alcohol problems in FinnTwin12. Genomewide polygenic scores included all SNPs surpassing a designated p-value threshold. DNase polygenic scores were a subset of the genomewide polygenic scores including only variants in DNase I hypersensitive sites (DHSs), which are open chromatin marks likely to index regions with a regulatory function. We conducted parallel analyses using height as a nonpsychiatric model phenotype to evaluate the consistency of effects. For the G × E analyses, we examined whether SNPs in DHSs were overrepresented among SNPs demonstrating significant G × E effects in an interaction between romantic relationship status and intoxication frequency. RESULTS: Contrary to our expectations, we found that DNase polygenic scores were not more strongly predictive of alcohol problems than conventional polygenic scores. However, variants in DNase polygenic scores had per-SNP effects that were up to 1.4 times larger than variants in conventional polygenic scores. This same pattern of effects was also observed in supplementary analyses with height. In G × E models, SNPs in DHSs were modestly overrepresented among SNPs with significant interaction effects for intoxication frequency. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential utility of integrating functional genomic annotation information to increase the signal-to-noise ratio in polygenic scores and identify genetic variants that may be most susceptible to environmental modification.
BACKGROUND: Characterizing aggregate genetic risk for alcohol misuse and identifying variants involved in gene-by-environment (G × E) interaction effects has so far been a major challenge. We hypothesized that functional genomic information could be used to enhance detection of polygenic signal underlying alcohol misuse and to prioritize identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) most likely to exhibit G × E effects. METHODS: We examined these questions in the young adult FinnTwin12 sample (n = 1,170). We used genomewide association estimates from an independent sample to derive 2 types of polygenic scores for alcohol problems in FinnTwin12. Genomewide polygenic scores included all SNPs surpassing a designated p-value threshold. DNase polygenic scores were a subset of the genomewide polygenic scores including only variants in DNase Ihypersensitive sites (DHSs), which are open chromatin marks likely to index regions with a regulatory function. We conducted parallel analyses using height as a nonpsychiatric model phenotype to evaluate the consistency of effects. For the G × E analyses, we examined whether SNPs in DHSs were overrepresented among SNPs demonstrating significant G × E effects in an interaction between romantic relationship status and intoxication frequency. RESULTS: Contrary to our expectations, we found that DNase polygenic scores were not more strongly predictive of alcohol problems than conventional polygenic scores. However, variants in DNase polygenic scores had per-SNP effects that were up to 1.4 times larger than variants in conventional polygenic scores. This same pattern of effects was also observed in supplementary analyses with height. In G × E models, SNPs in DHSs were modestly overrepresented among SNPs with significant interaction effects for intoxication frequency. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential utility of integrating functional genomic annotation information to increase the signal-to-noise ratio in polygenic scores and identify genetic variants that may be most susceptible to environmental modification.
Authors: Alexander Gusev; S Hong Lee; Gosia Trynka; Hilary Finucane; Bjarni J Vilhjálmsson; Han Xu; Chongzhi Zang; Stephan Ripke; Brendan Bulik-Sullivan; Eli Stahl; Anna K Kähler; Christina M Hultman; Shaun M Purcell; Steven A McCarroll; Mark Daly; Bogdan Pasaniuc; Patrick F Sullivan; Benjamin M Neale; Naomi R Wray; Soumya Raychaudhuri; Alkes L Price Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Matthew T Maurano; Richard Humbert; Eric Rynes; Robert E Thurman; Eric Haugen; Hao Wang; Alex P Reynolds; Richard Sandstrom; Hongzhu Qu; Jennifer Brody; Anthony Shafer; Fidencio Neri; Kristen Lee; Tanya Kutyavin; Sandra Stehling-Sun; Audra K Johnson; Theresa K Canfield; Erika Giste; Morgan Diegel; Daniel Bates; R Scott Hansen; Shane Neph; Peter J Sabo; Shelly Heimfeld; Antony Raubitschek; Steven Ziegler; Chris Cotsapas; Nona Sotoodehnia; Ian Glass; Shamil R Sunyaev; Rajinder Kaul; John A Stamatoyannopoulos Journal: Science Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Peter B Barr; Jessica E Salvatore; Hermine H Maes; Tellervo Korhonen; Antti Latvala; Fazil Aliev; Richard Viken; Richard J Rose; Jaakko Kaprio; Danielle M Dick Journal: J Stud Alcohol Drugs Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 2.582
Authors: Danielle M Dick; Jacquelyn L Meyers; Richard J Rose; Jaakko Kaprio; Kenneth S Kendler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2011-06-20 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Hamdi Mbarek; Yuri Milaneschi; Iryna O Fedko; Jouke-Jan Hottenga; Marleen H M de Moor; Rick Jansen; Joel Gelernter; Richard Sherva; Gonneke Willemsen; Dorret I Boomsma; Brenda W Penninx; Jacqueline M Vink Journal: Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 3.568
Authors: Shaun M Purcell; Naomi R Wray; Jennifer L Stone; Peter M Visscher; Michael C O'Donovan; Patrick F Sullivan; Pamela Sklar Journal: Nature Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Brian M Hicks; D Angus Clark; Joseph D Deak; Mengzhen Liu; C Emily Durbin; Jonathan D Schaefer; Sylia Wilson; William G Iacono; Matt McGue; Scott I Vrieze Journal: Clin Psychol Sci Date: 2021-05-06
Authors: Jacquelyn L Meyers; Jessica E Salvatore; Fazil Aliev; Emma C Johnson; Vivia V McCutcheon; Jinni Su; Sally I-Chun Kuo; Dongbing Lai; Leah Wetherill; Jen C Wang; Grace Chan; Victor Hesselbrock; Tatiana Foroud; Kathleen K Bucholz; Howard J Edenberg; Danielle M Dick; Bernice Porjesz; Arpana Agrawal Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Richard J Rose; Jessica E Salvatore; Sari Aaltonen; Peter B Barr; Leonie H Bogl; Holly A Byers; Kauko Heikkilä; Tellervo Korhonen; Antti Latvala; Teemu Palviainen; Anu Ranjit; Alyce M Whipp; Lea Pulkkinen; Danielle M Dick; Jaakko Kaprio Journal: Twin Res Hum Genet Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 1.587