Menu
GWAS Study

Genome-Wide Association Study of Non-syndromic Orofacial Clefts in a Multiethnic Sample of Families and Controls Identifies Novel Regions.

Mukhopadhyay N, Feingold E, Moreno-Uribe L et al.

33898419 PubMed ID
GWAS Study Type
9447 Participants
Scroll to explore
Chapter I

Publication Details

Comprehensive information about this research publication

Authors

MN
Mukhopadhyay N
FE
Feingold E
ML
Moreno-Uribe L
WG
Wehby G
VL
Valencia-Ramirez LC
MC
Muñeton CPR
PC
Padilla C
DF
Deleyiannis F
CK
Christensen K
PF
Poletta FA
OI
Orioli IM
HJ
Hecht JT
BC
Buxó CJ
BA
Butali A
AW
Adeyemo WL
VA
Vieira AR
SJ
Shaffer JR
MJ
Murray JC
WS
Weinberg SM
LE
Leslie EJ
MM
Marazita ML
Chapter II

Abstract

Summary of the research findings

Orofacial clefts (OFCs) are among the most prevalent craniofacial birth defects worldwide and create a significant public health burden. The majority of OFCs are non-syndromic and vary in prevalence by ethnicity. Africans have the lowest prevalence of OFCs (~ 1/2,500), Asians have the highest prevalence (~1/500), Europeans and Latin Americans lie somewhere in the middle (~1/800 and 1/900, respectively). Thus, ethnicity appears to be a major determinant of the risk of developing OFC. The Pittsburgh Orofacial Clefts Multiethnic study was designed to explore this ethnic variance, comprising a large number of families and individuals (~12,000 individuals) from multiple populations worldwide: US and Europe, Asians, mixed Native American/Caucasians, and Africans. In this current study, we analyzed 2,915 OFC cases, 6,044 unaffected individuals related to the OFC cases, and 2,685 controls with no personal or family history of OFC. Participants were grouped by their ancestry into African, Asian, European, and Central and South American subsets, and genome-wide association run on the combined sample as well as the four ancestry-based groups. We observed 22 associations to cleft lip with or without cleft palate at 18 distinct loci with p-values < 1e-06, including 10 with genome-wide significance (<5e-08), in the combined sample and within ancestry groups. Three loci - 2p12 (rs62164740, p = 6.27e-07), 10q22.2 (rs150952246, p = 3.14e-07), and 10q24.32 (rs118107597, p = 8.21e-07) are novel. Nine were in or near known OFC loci - PAX7, IRF6, FAM49A, DCAF4L2, 8q24.21, NTN1, WNT3-WNT9B, TANC2, and RHPN2. The majority of the associations were observed only in the combined sample, European, and Central and South American groups. We investigated whether the observed differences in association strength were (a) purely due to sample sizes, (b) due to systematic allele frequency difference at the population level, or (c) due to the fact certain OFC-causing variants confer different amounts of risk depending on ancestral origin, by comparing effect sizes to observed allele frequencies of the effect allele in our ancestry-based groups. While some of the associations differ due to systematic differences in allele frequencies between groups, others show variation in effect size despite similar frequencies across ancestry groups.

154 African ancestry cases, 274 African ancestry controls, 445 Asian ancestry cases, 1,246 Asian ancestry controls, 569 European ancestry cases, 2,704 European ancestry controls, 1,050 Central and South American cases, 2,988 Central and South American controls, 3 cases, 14 controls

Chapter III

Study Statistics

Key metrics and study information

9447
Total Participants
GWAS
Study Type
No
Replicated
African unspecified, European, Hispanic or Latin American, Asian unspecified
Ancestry
Ethiopia, Nigeria, U.S., Turkey, Denmark, Hungary, Spain, Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Puerto Rico, China, India, Philippines
Recruitment Country
Chapter IV

Analysis

Comprehensive review of health and genetic findings

Important Disclaimer: This review has been performed semi-automatically and is provided for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, this analysis may contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations of the original research. DNA Genics disclaims all liability for any inaccuracies, errors, or consequences arising from the use of this information. Users should independently verify all information and consult original research publications before making any decisions based on this content. This analysis is not intended as a substitute for professional scientific review or medical advice.

Analysis In Progress

Our analysis of this publication is currently being prepared. Please check back soon for comprehensive insights into the health and genetic findings discussed in this research.