Lucky draw in the gene raffle

The Cancer Genome Project intends to search every human gene for cancer-related mutations. Its first success is the discovery of such mutations in the BRAF gene.

The search for genes contributing to endometriosis risk

BACKGROUND: Genetic variation contributes to the risk of developing endometriosis. This review summarizes gene mapping studies in endometriosis and the prospects of finding gene pathways contributing to disease using the latest genome-wide strategies. METHODS: To identify candidate-gene association studies of endometriosis, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed of publications up to 1 April 2008, using the search terms 'endometriosis' plus 'allele' or 'polymorphism' or 'gene'. Papers included were those with information on both case and control selection, showed allelic and/or genotypic results for named germ-line polymorphisms and were published in the English language. RESULTS: Genetic variants in 76 genes have been examined for association, but none shows convincing evidence of replication in multiple studies. There is evidence for genetic linkage to chromosomes 7 and 10, but the genes (or variants) in these regions contributing to disease risk have yet to be identified. Genome-wide association is a powerful method that has been successful in locating genetic variants contributing to a range of common diseases. Several groups are planning these studies in endometriosis. For this to be successful, the endometriosis research community must work together to genotype sufficient cases, using clearly defined disease classifications, and conduct the necessary replication studies in several thousands of cases and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Genes with convincing evidence for association with endometriosis are likely to be identified in large genome-wide studies. This will provide a starting point for functional and biological studies to develop better diagnosis and treatment for this debilitating disease.

A genome-wide linkage scan provides evidence for both new and previously reported loci influencing common migraine

Latent class analysis was performed on migraine symptom data collected in a Dutch population sample (N = 12,210, 59% female) in order to obtain empirical groupings of individuals suffering from symptoms of migraine headache. Based on these heritable groupings (h(2) = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.41-0.57) individuals were classified as affected (migrainous headache) or unaffected. Genome-wide linkage analysis was performed using genotype data from 105 families with at least 2 affected siblings. In addition to this primary phenotype, linkage analyses were performed for the individual migraine symptoms. Significance levels, corrected for the analysis of multiple traits, were determined empirically via a novel simulation approach. Suggestive linkage for migrainous headache was found on chromosomes 1 (LOD = 1.63; pointwise P = 0.0031), 13 (LOD = 1.63; P = 0.0031), and 20 (LOD = 1.85; P = 0.0018). Interestingly, the chromosome 1 peak was located close to the ATP1A2 gene, associated with familial hemiplegic migraine type 2 (FHM2). Individual symptom analysis produced a LOD score of 1.97 (P = 0.0013) on chromosome 5 (photo/phonophobia), a LOD score of 2.13 (P = 0.0009) on chromosome 10 (moderate/severe pain intensity) and a near significant LOD score of 3.31 (P = 0.00005) on chromosome 13 (pulsating headache). These peaks were all located near regions previously reported in migraine linkage studies. Our results provide important replication and support for the presence of migraine susceptibility genes within these regions, and further support the utility of an LCA-based phenotyping approach and analysis of individual symptoms in migraine genetic research. Additionally, our novel "2-step" analysis and simulation approach provides a powerful means to investigate linkage to individual trait components.

Les macrophages d’ascendance européenne et africaine répondent différemment aux infections bactériennes

Des études antérieures démontrent que les descendants de peuples européens et africains présentent des différences de susceptibilité à certaines maladies infectieuses. Ces différences suggèrent des variations interpopulationnelles de la réponse immunitaire qui résultent probablement de l’adaptation de ces individus aux pathogènes de leur environnement. Nous avons caractérisé la réponse immunitaire chez des descendants de peuples européens et africains à des infections bactériennes. Nous avons infecté des macrophages dérivés de monocytes de 30 Américains d’origine africaine (Africains) et de 31 Américains d’origine européenne (Européens) avec les pathogènes intracellulaires Listeria monocytogenes et Salmonella typhimurium pendant 4 heures, puis nous avons mesuré le niveau d’expression pangénomique des cellules infectées et non infectées par séquençage de l’ARNm. Nous avons estimé le niveau de contrôle de l’infection par les macrophages à 2, 4 et 24 heures post-infection en évaluant le taux de survie des bactéries. Nous avons observé que les Africains présentent significativement moins de bactéries intracellulaires après 4 et 24 heures que les Européens, suggérant que les Africains contrôlent mieux les infections bactériennes. Nous avons identifié des différences interpopulationnelles dans le niveau de sécrétion des cytokines et dans le niveau d’expression de certains gènes, ce qui suggère que les Africains modulent une réponse inflammatoire plus forte que les Européens. Nous avons démontré que plusieurs de ces gènes ont subi des évènements de sélection positive récents seulement chez les Européens. Notre étude a identifié plusieurs gènes candidats susceptibles d’influencer le cours des infections bactériennes chez les humains. Nos résultats indiquent que les différences dans la progression des maladies infectieuses entre les populations européennes et africaines seraient le résultat de la sélection naturelle.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

The past, present, and future of human centromere genomics.

The centromere is the chromosomal locus essential for chromosome inheritance and genome stability. Human centromeres are located at repetitive alpha satellite DNA arrays that compose approximately 5% of the genome. Contiguous alpha satellite DNA sequence is absent from the assembled reference genome, limiting current understanding of centromere organization and function. Here, we review the progress in centromere genomics spanning the discovery of the sequence to its molecular characterization and the work done during the Human Genome Project era to elucidate alpha satellite structure and sequence variation. We discuss exciting recent advances in alpha satellite sequence assembly that have provided important insight into the abundance and complex organization of this sequence on human chromosomes. In light of these new findings, we offer perspectives for future studies of human centromere assembly and function.

Comparative genomics of the neglected human malaria parasite Plasmodium vivax

The human malaria parasite Plasmodium vivax is responsible for 25 - 40% of the similar to 515 million annual cases of malaria worldwide. Although seldom fatal, the parasite elicits severe and incapacitating clinical symptoms and often causes relapses months after a primary infection has cleared. Despite its importance as a major human pathogen, P. vivax is little studied because it cannot be propagated continuously in the laboratory except in non- human primates. We sequenced the genome of P. vivax to shed light on its distinctive biological features, and as a means to drive development of new drugs and vaccines. Here we describe the synteny and isochore structure of P. vivax chromosomes, and show that the parasite resembles other malaria parasites in gene content and metabolic potential, but possesses novel gene families and potential alternative invasion pathways not recognized previously. Completion of the P. vivax genome provides the scientific community with a valuable resource that can be used to advance investigation into this neglected species.