SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

GWAS and transcriptional analysis prioritize ITPR1 and CNTN4 for a serum uric acid 3p26 QTL in Mexican Americans.

BMC Genomics · 2016-04-02

DOI: 10.1186/s12864-016-2594-5PMID: 27039371

Open accessresearch-article; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundThe variation in serum uric acid concentrations is under significant genetic influence. Elevated SUA concentrations have been linked to increased risk for gout, kidney stones, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease whereas reduced serum uric acid concentrations have been linked to multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease. Previously, we identified a novel locus on chromosome 3p26 affecting serum uric acid concentrations in Mexican Americans from San Antonio Family Heart Study. As a follow up, we examined genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data in an extended cohort of 1281 Mexican Americans from multigenerational families of the San Antonio Family Heart Study and the San Antonio Family Diabetes/Gallbladder Study. We used a linear regression-based joint linkage/association test under an additive model of allelic effect, while accounting for non-independence among family members via a kinship variance component.ResultsUnivariate genetic analysis indicated serum uric acid concentrations to be significant heritable (h (2) = 0.50 ± 0.05, p ConclusionOur results confirm the importance of the chromosome 3p26 locus and genetic variants in this region in the regulation of serum uric acid concentrations.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.