| Literature DB >> 31757224 |
Yu-Fang Pei1,2, Wen-Zhu Hu3, Xiao-Lin Yang2,4, Xin-Tong Wei1,2, Gui-Juan Feng1,2, Hong Zhang2,4, Hui Shen5, Qing Tian5, Hong-Wen Deng5, Lei Zhang6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low lean body mass is the most important predictor of sarcopenia with strong genetic background. The aim of this study was to uncover genetic factors underlying lean mass development.Entities:
Keywords: 6p21.1; Genome-wide association study; Lean body mass; NFKBIE
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31757224 PMCID: PMC6874818 DOI: 10.1186/s13395-019-0212-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Skelet Muscle ISSN: 2044-5040 Impact factor: 4.912
Fig. 1Logarithmic quantile–quantile (QQ) plot of the discovery GWAS p values. Ten-based logarithmic p value was plotted versus theoretical expectation (in red), while the theoretical expectation and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were plotted in dashed black line. The deviation from the theoretical expectation in the tail distribution implied the existence of positive association signals
Main association results of leg lean mass at 6p21.1
| SNP | Position | Alleles | EAF | FHS ( | WHI-AA ( | KCOS ( | GIANT+UKB (BMI) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta | Beta | Beta | Beta | |||||||||
| rs551145 | 44237448 | C/T | 0.75 | 0.10 | 0.27 | 2.25 × 10−3 | 0.08 | 8.49 × 10−3 | - | - | - | |
| rs545970 | 44239677 | C/G | 0.31 | − 0.10 | − 0.11 | 0.04 | − 0.07 | 0.02 | − 0.01 | 7.00 × 10−3 | 634887 | |
| rs571770 | 44240193 | C/G | 0.31 | − 0.10 | − 0.19 | 5.97 × 10−3 | − 0.07 | 0.01 | − 4.80 × 10−3 | 9.80 × 10−3 | 688916 | |
| rs524533 | 44240559 | C/T | 0.42 | − 0.10 | − 0.23 | 1.61 × 10−3 | − 0.07 | 0.02 | − 0.01 | 7.80 × 10−3 | 687217 | |
Physical position is based on the human genome GRCH37 assembly. The first and second alleles are the effect and the other alleles. EAF: effect allele frequency in the European population. Beta: regression coefficient of the effect allele. FHS, Framingham Heart Study; WHI-AA, Women’s Health Initiative–African American sub sample; KCOS, Kansas City Osteoporosis Study; UKB. UK Biobank. The joint analysis of the GIANT and the UKB samples represents the largest study of BMI, and is used for cross-validation of the association with leg lean mass in the present study. p values below the genome-wide significance level (5.0 × 10−8) are set in italics. “-,” not available; “p*,” one-sided p value
Fig. 2Regional plot of the associated region 6p21.1 in the discovery GWAS Regional plot of the lead SNP rs513688 and its flanking 400 kb region to either side. X-axis is chromosome coordinate, and Y-axis is minus ten-based logarithmic p value
Fig. 3LD pattern of the 12 associated SNP at 6p21.1 Phased haplotypes were retrieved from the 503 individuals of European population (left) or the 319 individuals of African population (right) of the 1000 Genomes Project. LD plot was displayed with Haploview [24]
Fig. 4EMSA assay a–d EMSA results for rs524533, rs571770, rs551145, and rs545970, respectively. For both alleles at each SNP, five conditions were conducted: (1) negative control in which neither competitor probe nor nucleoproteins were added (lanes 1 and 6); (2) binding reaction in which labeled probe and nucleoproteins were added (lanes 2 and 7); (3) competition reaction in which 2-fold excess of competitor probe were added (lanes 3 and 8); (4) competition reaction in which 10-fold excess of competitor probe were added (lanes 4 and 9); and (5) competition reaction in which 50-fold excess of competitor probe were added (lanes 5 and 10). Only rs524533 and rs571770 showed allelic specific binding affinity to some unknown nuclear protein, while rs551145 and rs545970 did not
Fig. 5Dual-luciferase reporter assay. The pGL3-promoter vector was set as negative control (NC). Four replicates were conducted under each condition. Compared with the NC vector, the vector containing either rs524533 or rs571770 largely decreases luciferase expression (p = 1.07 × 10−5–5.33 × 10−6). At rs524533, the decrease for allele C construct is less than that for allele T construct by 4.7-fold (p = 8.41 × 10−4). At rs571770, the decrease for allele C construct is less than that for allele G construct by 2.5-fold (p = 4.09 × 10−3). **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001