Examen
Page URL: https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_92268

DNA duplications and deletions don't bridge 'heritability gap'

6 April 2010
Appeared in BioNews 552

A study investigating the effects of common large DNA deletions and duplications has found no new links to complex disease. The research by the Wellcome Trust Case Consortium was published in Nature last week.

The multinational team compared the frequency of common duplications (termed Copy Number Variation or CNVs) in DNA from 16000 patients affected by complex diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and diabetes, to the DNA of 3000 controls (without disease). The Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) found three CNVs associated with complex disease, but these were already known.

These results reveal a limited role for common CNVs in disease susceptibility. Previous studies have shown SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) have a similarly limited role in disease susceptibility. Taken together, common CNVs and SNPs cannot account for the heritability of disease between generations.

The results beg the question: why do large changes in DNA such as CNVs not play a significant role in complex disease? In particular, large changes in DNA would be expected to have a greater impact on disease than a SNP. The authors state: 'Having completed these analyses the hypothesis that, a priori, an arbitrary common CNV is much more likely than an arbitrary common SNP to affect disease susceptibility is not supported by our data'.

The answer most likely comes from natural selection. For the CNV to be detected in the study, it must be common in the population. But highly detrimental changes in DNA are largely filtered out of the genome, meaning only CNVs and SNPs with small effects on disease susceptibility are common. Since there are far fewer CNVs than SNPs, the total contribution of CNVs to disease is - predictably - less.

Disappointing as these results are, they prompt the continued search for 'missing' heritability. Scientists are already examining rarer CNVs and SNPS, which are likely to have a larger effect on susceptibility to disease.

SOURCES & REFERENCES
Common copy number variation doesn't explain much complex disease risk - but why not?
Science Blogs: Genetic Future |  1 January 1970
Genome-wide association study of CNVs in 16,000 cases of eight common diseases and 3,000 shared controls
Nature |  1 January 1970
RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE
29 March 2010 - by Dr Will Fletcher 
A recent study has lent more weight to the view that 'Junk DNA' may be anything but junk. A joint effort by the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Heidelberg, Germany and Stanford University, California, US, has uncovered large differences between the non-coding DNA of different individuals, which may be associated with differing levels of disease risk and other traits too...
22 March 2010 - by Dr Rachael Panizzo 
Breast cancer risk prediction does not improve significantly when genetic information is included in the risk prediction model, a new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has found....
8 March 2010 - by Dr Rachael Panizzo 
A genetic risk score based on several genetic markers associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) does not improve the prediction of CVD risk, research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association has suggested...
25 January 2010 - by Maren Urner 
An international team of 174 research centres has identified 13 new gene variants associated with blood glucose and insulin, with five linked to Type-2 diabetes. The findings - published last week in the journal Nature Genetics -raise hopes of better treatments for the condition....
HAVE YOUR SAY
Log in to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions


Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.