- Research article
- Open Access
Evaluating diabetes and hypertension disease causality using mouse phenotypes
© Yu et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010
- Received: 3 March 2010
- Accepted: 20 July 2010
- Published: 20 July 2010
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have found hundreds of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with common diseases. However, it is largely unknown what genes linked with the SNPs actually implicate disease causality. A definitive proof for disease causality can be demonstration of disease-like phenotypes through genetic perturbation of the genes or alleles, which is obviously a daunting task for complex diseases where only mammalian models can be used.
Here we tapped the rich resource of mouse phenotype data and developed a method to quantify the probability that a gene perturbation causes the phenotypes of a disease. Using type II diabetes (T2D) and hypertension (HT) as study cases, we found that the genes, when perturbed, having high probability to cause T2D and HT phenotypes tend to be hubs in the interactome networks and are enriched for signaling pathways regulating metabolism but not metabolic pathways, even though the genes in these metabolic pathways are often the most significantly changed in expression levels in these diseases.
Compared to human genetic disease-based predictions, our mouse phenotype based predictors greatly increased the coverage while keeping a similarly high specificity. The disease phenotype probabilities given by our approach can be used to evaluate the likelihood of disease causality of disease-associated genes and genes surrounding disease-associated SNPs.
- Mouse Genome Informatics
- Disease Causality
- Disease Causal Gene
- Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium
- Interactome Network
Common complex diseases, such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension and cancers, have strong genetic components, but their genetic risk loci are difficult to identify reliably until the recent development of array-based genotyping technology. Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium (WTCCC)  and others have used microarrays of commonly occurring single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to map genome-wide associations of SNP loci to common diseases and identified hundreds of association loci. However, this technology was designed to efficiently cover common genetic variations and was not designed to test rare SNPs or coding polymorphisms. In only a few cases were coding polymorphisms identified, suggesting that SNPs were only associated and not causative. Assignment of the nearest genes to these association signals as the associated genes, although a common practice, has been found to be not reliable . The disease-associated genes responsible for the SNP association signals can be far away from the SNPs and are not readily mapped [3, 4]. Therefore, what genes and how they are responsible for the association signals remain an urgent post-GWAS issue.
Although many network-based ranking strategies have been developed [5–8], these approaches can only implicate genes that are more functionally associated with the disease genes, but not disease causal genes. Another major drawback of these methods is that they are greatly influenced by the overrepresentation of "hot genes" that are much more studied than other genes, leading to a biased evaluation. Therefore, an unbiased evaluation method for disease causality of a gene is still lacking. The ultimate proof that a gene or locus is causative to a disease comes from replicating disease phenotypes in a genetic model of the gene or allele. Human genetic mutation and phenotypes have been well curated in the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) database  and have been used to evaluate phenotype similarities between different gene perturbations . However, the coverage of the human genetic disease phenotypes is very limited (only 3,259 genes are covered by OMIM and the great majority of them are related to monogenic diseases). In contrast, a plethora of mouse genetic phenotypes are available but have never been systematically examined before. The Mouse Genome Informatics (MGI) database  contains phenotypic descriptions based on the controlled terms in 'phenotype ontology' (PO) for mutants of 12,302 genes (5,667 of which can be directly mapped to human Entrez genes). Moreover, the numbers of both genes and phenotypes in MGI are growing rapidly.
Although not all genes in MGI are tested for all the phenotypes, the appearance of partial or similar phenotypes to a disease often implicate the existence of other phenotypes of the disease. Complex diseases, such as diabetes often display multiple co-appearing clinical traits (phenotypes), which provide a better chance to determine whether a gene perturbation may cause such diseases than for simple genetic diseases consisting of only one or two phenotypes. We therefore took advantage of the well-organized tree-like structure of PO in the MGI database and developed a decision tree-based classifier to quantify, given the observed phenotypes, the likelihood (expressed as weighted probabilities) that perturbation of a single gene would cause the common metabolic diseases hypertension (HT) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) phenotypes (Methods). We show that the phenotype probabilities given by our classifier can be used to uncover the biological processes preferentially targeted by these common metabolic diseases and to evaluate the likelihood of disease causality of genes linked to GWAS signals.
Disease phenotype classifier
Then to predict and calculate the probability for a new test gene to have the phenotype, we search from the top of the decision tree to locate the node by matching all of its other phenotypes to the nodes in the tree and assign the (GSP/GSP+GSN) value associated with the node to the gene. Thus, genes traced to different nodes will be assigned different probabilities. Then a weight was introduced to correct (by punishing) the abundance of different phenotypes. The sum of weighted probabilities of a gene to cause all the different phenotypes of the disease was assigned to the gene to measure the likelihood of a gene perturbation to result in HT or T2D phenotypes (Fig. 1A, Methods). In order to evaluate the prediction accuracy first at the phenotype level, we examine the cross-validation results of the decision trees based on 10 randomly selected phenotypes and all the phenotypes associated with T2D and HT (Fig. 1C). The ROCs in the cross-validations all have area under curve (AUC) between 0.717 to 0.999 as compared with the randomly expected AUC of 0.5, indicative of high sensitivity and specificity of the decision trees in predicting the phenotypes (Fig. 1C).
Phenotype scores reflect biological pathways perturbed in HT or T2D
If this is also true in our case, we would expect genes with high HT or T2D phenotype probabilities to be more significantly linked to the metabolic pathways found through gene expression analysis than random expectation. To test this, we examined the interactions between these two sets of genes using the annotated functional interactions curated in the Human Protein Reference Database (HPRD) and KEGG databases. We measured the number of interactions between the two sets of genes. Indeed, the two sets of genes were significantly linked than randomly expected as shown by Monte Carlo simulations (Fig. 2B, Additional File 1, Fig. S2B). These results suggest that these complex diseases are caused by dysregulation of metabolism rather than metabolism per se.
Genes with high interaction degrees (k, number of links) or hubs in the interactome networks often play critical regulatory functions and are more likely to be disease-associated . Meanwhile disease-related genes generally have higher degrees than non-disease related genes . Consistent with these previous findings, the genes with high HT or T2D phenotype probabilities (> 95% specificity, see below) also have significantly higher interaction degrees (average k = 21.6 and 23.9 for HT and T2D) than differentially expressed genes (average k = 16.8 and 15.0 for HT and T2D), which have slightly higher degrees than the average genes in the interactome network (average k = 11.5) (Fig. 2C). This suggests that phenotype probabilities given by our predictors are indeed more likely to identify disease causal genes than differential expression analysis.
Evaluating various disease-association datasets for disease causality
To see if the phenotype probabilities can serve as an unbiased benchmark for evaluating various disease-association datasets, we examined the phenotype probabilities of a few well-known collections of HT and T2D-associated genes. The Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) database and the Gene Association Database (GAD) list many genes that have been found to be associated with these diseases. However, some of the genes had been selected by a candidate gene approach and hence might be biased toward genes functionally related to certain biological processes. Moreover, some of the associations have been found in small sample sets and have not been replicated in an independent study. On the other hand, the GWAS signals are functionally unbiased but have largely not been attributed to causal or functional variants in genes. To another extreme, the KEGG database has annotated T2D pathways based on molecular functions.
Furthermore, both the average phenotype probabilities and the fold enriched over background (Methods) for the genes with high HT or T2D phenotype probabilities (> 95% specificity, see below) increase as the distance gets closer to the genomic locations of GWAS SNPs (Fig. 3C). In addition, the maximal T2D phenotype probabilities among genes within ± 1 Mbp of T2D-associated SNPs are significantly correlated with the case versus control odds ratios (ORs) of the SNPs (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.480, linear regression slope P = 0.03, Fig. 3D). In fact, the correlation can be observed in a rather broad region surrounding the disease-associated SNPs. While not correlated within 0.5 Mbp of the SNP, it reaches the highest level around 0.9 Mbp (Fig. 3D). These results confirm that phenotypic probabilities predicted from MGI phenotypes can indeed serve as an unbiased benchmark for the quality of association signals, and suggest that they may also be used as indicators for disease causality evaluation for genes linked to the disease-associated SNPs.
Predicting HT or T2D causal genes for GWAS signals
We also compared the prediction power of the MGI (mouse) phenotype probabilities to OMIM (human) phenotype similarities, which are the sum of pair-wise similarity scores between HT/T2D and each of the diseases described for a candidate gene in the OMIM database (Methods). To do this, we used the GSP genes shown in Fig. 3A and treated all the other genes as GSN to plot ROCs by scoring all the human genes using the MGI or OMIM phenotype-base predictors. Because over 80% of the Intersection genes are present in OMIM, using the Intersection genes as GSPs will greatly overestimate the accuracy of the OMIM-based phenotype scoring. Therefore, we only used the replicated GAD gene set to fairly compare MGI phenotype probabilities to OMIM phenotype similarities. The prediction coverage of the MGI phenotype probabilities is obviously much higher than the OMIM phenotype similarities, while their specificities are similar (Fig. 4). The useful coverage of MGI phenotype probabilities is 2.78- and 3.00-fold of that of OMIM phenotype similarities for HT and T2D, respectively (comparing the second to last points on the ROCs in Fig. 4), suggesting it as a valuable resource for phenotype quantification and disease causal gene prediction. The control ROCs, where GSPs were replaced by the same number of randomly selected genes, all appear to be straight diagonal lines from the start point of zero coverage and zero specificity to the end point of zero specificity and maximal coverage for a particular dataset (Fig. 4). This confirms that the phenotype predictors are not biased to give GSPs higher scores, and that it is the phenotypic correlations of disease-associated genes that allow identification of disease genes.
The GWAS by WTCCC has reported association loci at various significance levels. Although the study reported a P value < 10-7 as the most confident criteria for disease association, a P value < 10-4 might also indicate real association with a relatively higher false discovery rate . Together with the signals that have been identified in other GWAS [17–24], at 95% specificity level, we have predicted 22 and 18 genes mostly likely to be the causal genes for HT and T2D GWAS signals (Additional File 3). These genes are again enriched for signaling pathways regulating metabolism, but not enriched for metabolic pathways (data not shown).
The higher than average phenotype probabilities and the enrichment for high probability genes at the vicinity of GWAS SNPs (Fig. 3C) support the reliability of our phenotype predictors as well as the quality of association data. These were further reinforced by the correlation of the maximal predicted probability to generate T2D phenotypes surrounding T2D-associated SNPs with the OR of the T2D-associated SNPs. The lack of such a correlation for HT might be due to the inhomogeneity of the case populations, as reflected by the drastic differences in allele frequencies: 44% of the HT OR values of are < 1, in which case the major alleles, but not the minor alleles, are associated with the disease, which has never occurred for T2D and most other complex diseases . This may suggest that HT is associated with a broad spectrum of disease etiologies. Thus, in some cases the most common major alleles may cause disease and are detrimental, whereas the minor allele counter-intuitively can offer protection, while in other cases the scenarios are exactly the opposite.
As the more strongly a gene perturbation near a SNP influences the disease phenotype, the higher the SNP's odds ratio (OR), in Fig. 3D we calculated the correlation (PCC) between the maximal phenotype probability of genes within x Mbp of SNPs and the T2D association OR of the nearby GWAS SNP to identify the optimal region where a causal gene is identified for a causal SNP. When x is small, the real disease causal gene is not yet included in the region very close to the SNPs, which leads to the low correlation between phenotype probability and OR as both are at the background level. With the increase of x, some real disease related genes are included, which increase the PCC. The PCC reaches its peak when x = 1, indicating the region of 1 Mbp around the majority of SNPs covered the most (in number and in probability) causal genes. After that, while x is increasing, more false-positive genes are included which either may or may not decrease the correlation depending on whether the highest phenotype probability gene within the region changes, which apparently does not change from 1 Mbp to 3 Mbp and changes only farther than 3 Mbp away.
Many of the genes that we predicted to be the causal genes surrounding the GWAS SNPs have already been shown to be functionally or phenotypically associated with HT or T2D. For T2D, these genes include LEPR, PPARγ, insulin, WFS1, IDE, PPARα, KCNJ11, AQP2, GHRL and ABCC8 (Additional File 3). Most notably, defects in the insulin gene and the insulin degrading enzyme directly affect insulin signaling . The leptin receptor (LEPR) and ghrelin (GHRL) genes balance the regulation of food intake and adiposity [26, 27], a risk factor for T2D. PPARγ activation promotes adipocyte differentiation and storage of excess circulating carbohydrates as triacylglyceride . Additionally, KCNJ11 and ABCC8 form the subunits for the ATP-sensitive potassium channel that is required for glucose-stimulated insulin secretion from pancreatic β-cells .
Only five out of the 18 predicted T2D causal genes are not found to be co-cited with diabetes by automated co-citation search in the PubMed abstracts as described in  (Additional File 3). However, full gene name searches show all genes have functionally relevant roles in diabetes. Loss of histamine receptor H1 (HRH1) impairs leptin control of food intake, leading to obesity . PPARγ-mediated differentiation is directly repressed by the transcriptional modulator WWTR1 , whereas PPARγ-mediated lipid storage is indirectly affected by loss of acetyl-CoA carboxylase 1 (ACACA) or mitochondrial glycerol-3-phosphate acyltransferase (GPAM). Although the mechanism is unknown, mutations in the SOX4 gene result in diminished glucose-stimulated insulin secretion . Together, these findings for T2D causal genes further demonstrate the reliability and significance of this methodology.
We focused on hypertension and diabetes due to their commonality, the relatively well-defined phenotypic descriptions of the diseases, and the sufficient number of known disease-associated genes. Conceivably, the methods described here will be applicable to other diseases, given well-defined phenotypic descriptions and a large enough validated gene set for the diseases.
Despite the enormous advances on GWAS of common disease susceptibility loci, determining causal genetic loci is still a pressing issue to address. We for the first time tapped the rich resource of mouse phenotype data to quantify the probability of gene perturbation to induce phenotypes of a common disease. Our phenotype predictors were indeed able to identify the important regulatory pathways whose deregulation may lead to these metabolic diseases, instead of genes or pathways simply associated with or changed by the diseases. This type of causality inference is a unique feature of genes identified by genetic perturbation and phenotypic analysis and can only be indirectly reflected to a certain degree by some other type of analysis, such as gene-expression analysis. Therefore, genetic perturbation leading to phenotype alteration indeed can serve as a general rule for disease/phenotype causality evaluation. Furthermore, our introduction of mouse phenotype as disease causal effects evaluation criteria and developing it as quantitative criteria allows objective evaluation of various association datasets, and the disease phenotype probabilities given by our approach can be used to evaluate the likelihood of disease causality of disease-associated genes and genes surrounding disease-associated SNPs.
An ethics statement is not required for this work.
Phenotypes of mouse gene knock-out or transgenic mutants, together with the mouse gene to human ortholog mapping were downloaded from the Mouse Genome Information (MGI) database http://www.informatics.jax.org/ on Oct. 20, 2009. OMIM data was downloaded from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim/ on March 24, 2009.
The HT and T2D associated entries in the genetic association database (GAD) http://geneticassociationdb.nih.gov/ were downloaded on Dec 27, 2007. We kept only the genes that have the value 'Y' or 'P' for the attribute 'associated to disease'. This resulted in 89 and 138 genes for HT and T2D, respectively.
We downloaded the HT- or T2D-associated SNPs from the WTCCC website  and selected all the SNPs with association P < 0.0001. Other GWAS datasets on HT or T2D were obtained from individual GWAS publications [17–24]. SNP signals that have been replicated in multiple large-scale association or GWAS were obtained from ref. [19, 20].
Compilation of HT and T2D phenotypes
MP:0000182 increased circulating LDL cholesterol level
MP:0001556 increased circulating HDL cholesterol level
MP:0001759 increased urine glucose level
MP:0002079 increased circulating insulin level
MP:0005293 impaired glucose tolerance
MP:0001776 abnormal circulating sodium level
MP:0004217 salt-sensitive hypertension
MP:0006143 increased diastolic blood pressure
MP:0006144 increased systolic blood pressure
Training decision trees to score probability of exhibiting disease phenotypes by mouse mutants
In the phenotype ontology tree, all the other leaf node phenotypes that are not phenotype PT i or a child of PT i were used as classification attributes in the decision tree to predict the probability of a gene's perturbation to give phenotype PT i . We used the Weka J48 classifier http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/ which implements the C4.5 algorithm to build decision trees. To train a decision tree for target phenotype PT i , the algorithm starts with all genes in the training set in a single root node and then recursively splits each node N by testing for the presence or absence of the phenotype k that gives rise to the maximal information gain, which is defined as H(N)-H(N0)-H(N1) when splitting N into N0 and N1 by judging whether gene g has been annotated with phenotype k. Here, H(N) is the entropy of genes at node N, defined as -PGSP(logPGSP)-(1-PGSP)*log(1-PGSP), where PGSP is the percentage of GSP genes at node N. When no test at a node N gives a positive information gain, the node is not further split and becomes a leaf node with a probability value associated with it. For each disease phenotype (PT i ), we used the genes associated with PT i as positive training data and randomly chosen genes (five times the number of the positive instances) that are not associated with PT i as negative training data. Due to the unevenness of the number of genes associated at different levels of the phenotype ontology tree, we selected the lowest-level phenotypes with > = 10 genes as testable phenotypes to ensure enough training cases and branch points for the decision tree (using > = 20, 30 or 40 genes yielded similar results, Additional File 1). We repeated the negative set selection and decision tree training 100 times and used the average probability given by the 100 decision trees as the final probability for a gene to have the phenotype PT i . Our settings resulted in a range of 5 to 15 phenotype nodes per decision tree used for each phenotype prediction.
Likelihood of a gene perturbation to result in the phenotypes of a disease
We trained decision trees to assign a probability (the proportion of true positives (TP) in the leaf of a decision tree) of whether a gene in MGI phenotype database has a disease phenotype (see above), inspired by the method described for assigning gene functions . To account for the abundance of different phenotypes, a weight of -log 10 (f) of each phenotype is used to adjust the probability, where f is the frequency of the phenotype appearing among all the genes. The sum of weighted probabilities (-∑log 10 (f)P) of a gene to all the different phenotypes of the disease is assigned to the gene to measure the likelihood of a gene perturbation to result in phenotypes of a disease. Finally, these summed probabilities were normalized against their possible maximal value within each disease, to maintain their values between 0 - 1.
Scoring disease similarity
Phenotype similarities between diseases were calculated as previously described . All the OMIM diseases whose description contain the word "hypertension" for HT and "diabetes" or "diabetic" for T2D were used as the collection of reference nodes R in the disease similarity network. For a gene a in OMIM, its disease phenotype similarity to R is defined as S(a) = ∑ i ∑ j (s ij ), where i is a disease associated with a and ∉ R, disease j ∈ R, and s ij is the similarity score between diseases i and j.
Enrichment of GSEA pathways
Pathways were downloaded from the Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) molecular signature database  on Oct. 9, 2009. The significance of enrichment was calculated using the Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) software .
Differentially expressed genes in microarray experiments
Significantly differentially expressed genes between disease and control groups were determined using the RankProd program  at proportion of false positive (pfp) < 0.01 based on log2 fold changes in gene expression over the controls.
Empirical P values for observed number of interactions
The significance of the observed number of interactions between two sets of genes was determined by an empirical P value, which is the frequency for two randomly selected gene sets to have the same or greater number of interactions than what was observed.
Fold enriched over background is defined as (m/n)/(M/N), where M genes out of total N genes are disease related, and within a given gene set with n genes, there are m genes that are disease related.
We thank Drs. Rob Sladek (McGill University), Mark McCarthy (Oxford University) and Yong Liu (Institute of Nutrition, SIBS) for critical reading of the manuscript and invaluable suggestions, WTCCC for approving our research proposal and granting us data access. This work was supported by grants from the China National Science Foundation (Grant # 30890033, 30588001 and 30620120433), Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology (Grant # 2006CB910700) and funds from the Chinese Academy of Sciences to J.D.J.H.
- , : Genome-wide association study of 14, 000 cases of seven common diseases and 3, 000 shared controls. Nature. 2007, 447: 661-678. 10.1038/nature05911View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Schadt EE, Molony C, Chudin E, Hao K, Yang X, Lum PY, Kasarskis A, Zhang B, Wang S, Suver C, et al.: Mapping the genetic architecture of gene expression in human liver. PLoS Biol. 2008, 6: e107- 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060107PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Altshuler D, Daly MJ, Lander ES: Genetic mapping in human disease. Science. 2008, 322: 881-888. 10.1126/science.1156409PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- McCarthy MI, Abecasis GR, Cardon LR, Goldstein DB, Little J, Ioannidis JP, Hirschhorn JN: Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges. Nat Rev Genet. 2008, 9: 356-369. 10.1038/nrg2344View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lage K, Karlberg EO, Storling ZM, Olason PI, Pedersen AG, Rigina O, Hinsby AM, Tumer Z, Pociot F, Tommerup N, et al.: A human phenome-interactome network of protein complexes implicated in genetic disorders. Nat Biotechnol. 2007, 25: 309-316. 10.1038/nbt1295View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wu X, Jiang R, Zhang MQ, Li S: Network-based global inference of human disease genes. Mol Syst Biol. 2008, 4: 189- 10.1038/msb.2008.27PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kohler S, Bauer S, Horn D, Robinson PN: Walking the interactome for prioritization of candidate disease genes. Am J Hum Genet. 2008, 82: 949-958. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.02.013PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Linghu B, Snitkin ES, Hu Z, Xia Y, Delisi C: Genome-wide prioritization of disease genes and identification of disease-disease associations from an integrated human functional linkage network. Genome Biol. 2009, 10: R91- 10.1186/gb-2009-10-9-r91PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hamosh A, Scott AF, Amberger J, Bocchini C, Valle D, McKusick VA: Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), a knowledgebase of human genes and genetic disorders. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002, 30: 52-55. 10.1093/nar/30.1.52PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- van Driel MA, Bruggeman J, Vriend G, Brunner HG, Leunissen JA: A text-mining analysis of the human phenome. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006, 14: 535-542. 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201585View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bult CJ, Eppig JT, Kadin JA, Richardson JE, Blake JA: The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): mouse biology and model systems. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008, 36: D724-728. 10.1093/nar/gkm961PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, Paulovich A, Pomeroy SL, Golub TR, Lander ES, Mesirov JP: Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005, 102: 15545-15550. 10.1073/pnas.0506580102PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mootha VK, Lindgren CM, Eriksson KF, Subramanian A, Sihag S, Lehar J, Puigserver P, Carlsson E, Ridderstrale M, Laurila E, et al.: PGC-1alpha-responsive genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation are coordinately downregulated in human diabetes. Nature genetics. 2003, 34: 267-273. 10.1038/ng1180View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Patti ME, Butte AJ, Crunkhorn S, Cusi K, Berria R, Kashyap S, Miyazaki Y, Kohane I, Costello M, Saccone R, et al.: Coordinated reduction of genes of oxidative metabolism in humans with insulin resistance and diabetes: Potential role of PGC1 and NRF1. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003, 100: 8466-8471. 10.1073/pnas.1032913100PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yeger-Lotem E, Riva L, Su LJ, Gitler AD, Cashikar AG, King OD, Auluck PK, Geddie ML, Valastyan JS, Karger DR, et al.: Bridging high-throughput genetic and transcriptional data reveals cellular responses to alpha-synuclein toxicity. Nat Genet. 2009, 41: 316-323. 10.1038/ng.337PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Goh KI, Cusick ME, Valle D, Childs B, Vidal M, Barabasi AL: The human disease network. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007, 104: 8685-8690. 10.1073/pnas.0701361104PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Adeyemo A, Gerry N, Chen G, Herbert A, Doumatey A, Huang H, Zhou J, Lashley K, Chen Y, Christman M, Rotimi C: A genome-wide association study of hypertension and blood pressure in African Americans. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5: e1000564- 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000564PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Levy D, Ehret GB, Rice K, Verwoert GC, Launer LJ, Dehghan A, Glazer NL, Morrison AC, Johnson AD, Aspelund T, et al.: Genome-wide association study of blood pressure and hypertension. Nat Genet. 2009, 41: 677-687. 10.1038/ng.384PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Newton-Cheh C, Johnson T, Gateva V, Tobin MD, Bochud M, Coin L, Najjar SS, Zhao JH, Heath SC, Eyheramendy S, et al.: Genome-wide association study identifies eight loci associated with blood pressure. Nat Genet. 2009, 41: 666-676. 10.1038/ng.361PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Prokopenko I, McCarthy MI, Lindgren CM: Type 2 diabetes: new genes, new understanding. Trends Genet. 2008, 24: 613-621. 10.1016/j.tig.2008.09.004View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Saxena R, Voight BF, Lyssenko V, Burtt NP, de Bakker PI, Chen H, Roix JJ, Kathiresan S, Hirschhorn JN, Daly MJ, et al.: Genome-wide association analysis identifies loci for type 2 diabetes and triglyceride levels. Science. 2007, 316: 1331-1336. 10.1126/science.1142358View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Scott LJ, Mohlke KL, Bonnycastle LL, Willer CJ, Li Y, Duren WL, Erdos MR, Stringham HM, Chines PS, Jackson AU, et al.: A genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in Finns detects multiple susceptibility variants. Science. 2007, 316: 1341-1345. 10.1126/science.1142382PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sladek R, Rocheleau G, Rung J, Dina C, Shen L, Serre D, Boutin P, Vincent D, Belisle A, Hadjadj S, et al.: A genome-wide association study identifies novel risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Nature. 2007, 445: 881-885. 10.1038/nature05616View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zeggini E, Weedon MN, Lindgren CM, Frayling TM, Elliott KS, Lango H, Timpson NJ, Perry JR, Rayner NW, Freathy RM, et al.: Replication of genome-wide association signals in UK samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science. 2007, 316: 1336-1341. 10.1126/science.1142364PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Farris W, Mansourian S, Chang Y, Lindsley L, Eckman EA, Frosch MP, Eckman CB, Tanzi RE, Selkoe DJ, Guenette S: Insulin-degrading enzyme regulates the levels of insulin, amyloid beta-protein, and the beta-amyloid precursor protein intracellular domain in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003, 100: 4162-4167. 10.1073/pnas.0230450100PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chen G, Koyama K, Yuan X, Lee Y, Zhou YT, O'Doherty R, Newgard CB, Unger RH: Disappearance of body fat in normal rats induced by adenovirus-mediated leptin gene therapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996, 93: 14795-14799. 10.1073/pnas.93.25.14795PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tschop M, Smiley DL, Heiman ML: Ghrelin induces adiposity in rodents. Nature. 2000, 407: 908-913. 10.1038/35038090View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ferre P: The biology of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors: relationship with lipid metabolism and insulin sensitivity. Diabetes. 2004, 53 (Suppl 1): S43-50. 10.2337/diabetes.53.2007.S43View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Flanagan SE, Clauin S, Bellanne-Chantelot C, de Lonlay P, Harries LW, Gloyn AL, Ellard S: Update of mutations in the genes encoding the pancreatic beta-cell K(ATP) channel subunits Kir6.2 (KCNJ11) and sulfonylurea receptor 1 (ABCC8) in diabetes mellitus and hyperinsulinism. Hum Mutat. 2009, 30: 170-180. 10.1002/humu.20838View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Li Z, Zhang W, Wu M, Zhu S, Gao C, Sun L, Zhang R, Qiao N, Xue H, Hu Y, et al.: Gene expression-based classification and regulatory networks of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood. 2009, 114: 4486-4493. 10.1182/blood-2009-04-218123View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Masaki T, Chiba S, Yasuda T, Noguchi H, Kakuma T, Watanabe T, Sakata T, Yoshimatsu H: Involvement of hypothalamic histamine H1 receptor in the regulation of feeding rhythm and obesity. Diabetes. 2004, 53: 2250-2260. 10.2337/diabetes.53.9.2250View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hong JH, Hwang ES, McManus MT, Amsterdam A, Tian Y, Kalmukova R, Mueller E, Benjamin T, Spiegelman BM, Sharp PA, et al.: TAZ, a transcriptional modulator of mesenchymal stem cell differentiation. Science. 2005, 309: 1074-1078. 10.1126/science.1110955View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Goldsworthy M, Hugill A, Freeman H, Horner E, Shimomura K, Bogani D, Pieles G, Mijat V, Arkell R, Bhattacharya S, et al.: Role of the transcription factor sox4 in insulin secretion and impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes. 2008, 57: 2234-2244. 10.2337/db07-0337PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Becker KG, Barnes KC, Bright TJ, Wang SA: The genetic association database. Nat Genet. 2004, 36: 431-432. 10.1038/ng0504-431View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gunton JE, Kulkarni RN, Yim S, Okada T, Hawthorne WJ, Tseng YH, Roberson RS, Ricordi C, O'Connell PJ, Gonzalez FJ, Kahn CR: Loss of ARNT/HIF1beta mediates altered gene expression and pancreatic-islet dysfunction in human type 2 diabetes. Cell. 2005, 122: 337-349. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.05.027View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Leiter EH, Prochazka M, Coleman DL: The non-obese diabetic (NOD) mouse. Am J Pathol. 1987, 128: 380-383.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tisch R, McDevitt H: Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Cell. 1996, 85: 291-297. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81106-XView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- King OD, Foulger RE, Dwight SS, White JV, Roth FP: Predicting gene function from patterns of annotation. Genome Res. 2003, 13: 896-904. 10.1101/gr.440803PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Breitling R, Armengaud P, Amtmann A, Herzyk P: Rank products: a simple, yet powerful, new method to detect differentially regulated genes in replicated microarray experiments. FEBS letters. 2004, 573: 83-92. 10.1016/j.febslet.2004.07.055View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.