Skip Navigation
American College of Physicians Logo
  • Subscribe
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Sign In
    Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
    INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
    Sign In|Set Up Account
    You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
    INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
    Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
    Annals of Internal Medicine
    SUBSCRIBE
    Subscribe to Annals of Internal Medicine.
    You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your purchase.
Annals of Internal Medicine Logo Menu
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives
  • Author Info
Advanced Search
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Editorials |15 August 2006

Making Sense of Puzzling Genetic Association Studies: A Team Approach Free

Jennifer S. Lee, MD, PhD; Margaret A. Tucker, MD

Jennifer S. Lee, MD, PhD
From University of California, San Francisco, and California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA 94110, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

Margaret A. Tucker, MD
From University of California, San Francisco, and California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA 94110, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

Article, Author, and Disclosure Information
Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
  • From University of California, San Francisco, and California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA 94110, and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Grant Support: By the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.

    Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: None disclosed.

    Requests for Single Reprints: Margaret A. Tucker, MD, Genetic Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6120 Executive Boulevard, EPS 7122, Bethesda, MD 20892-7236; e-mail, tuckerp@exchange.nih.gov.

    Current Author Addresses: Dr. Lee: University of California, Davis, 1001 Potrero Avenue, Box 0862, San Francisco, CA 94110.

    Dr. Tucker: Genetic Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6120 Executive Boulevard, EPS 7122, Bethesda, MD 20892-7236.

×
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Jump To
  • Full Article
  • FULL ARTICLE
      1. References
  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplements
  • Audio/Video
  • Summary for Patients
  • Clinical Slide Sets
  • CME / MOC
  • Comments
  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
  • Email Link
More
  • LinkedIn Link
  • CiteULike Link
Osteoporosis affects approximately 5 to 8 million Americans older than 50 years of age, and the lifetime risk for osteoporotic fracture is approximately 40% in white women and at least 13% in men (1, 2). Low bone mineral density (BMD) is the major clinical indicator of osteoporotic disease. However, the proportion of fractures attributable to osteoporosis by low BMD is modest, ranging from less than 10% to 44% for specific fracture types and only approximately 15% for all fractures (3). No single factor, such as BMD, can explain osteoporosis, which is a complex metabolic disease caused by actions and interactions among multiple genes, gene products, and environmental factors. These actions and interactions translate to loss of BMD, bone microarchitecture, and bone strength, as well as to nontraumatic fractures. Older women with a parental history of hip fracture have a 2-fold higher risk for hip fracture than those without such a history (4). Family and twin studies indicate that inherited characteristics are responsible for 50% to 80% of the phenotypic variation in traits related to low BMD and fracture (5).
The vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene has been a particular target of investigation. Vitamin D regulates bone formation and resorption, intestinal calcium absorption, calcium and phosphate homeostasis, and parathyroid hormone secretion. Vitamin D modulates expression of many genes by first interacting with VDR, which then forms complexes that bind to regulator gene regions. Allelic variations in VDR might affect the ability to bind vitamin D, which would disrupt vitamin D actions and consequently increase the risk for osteoporosis and fracture. More than 10 years ago, Morrison and colleagues (6) reported the association between VDR variants and BMD. This observation initiated a wave of association studies relating VDR variants to osteoporosis (7). The biological pathways affected by the common variants, FokI, BsmI, ApaI, and TaqI, and their related haplotypes remain unclear; however, some studies have suggested that the haplotypes affect pathways leading to variations in bone mass and fracture risk (8). The more recently characterized Cdx2 polymorphism in the VDR promoter influences intestinal transcription of the VDR gene and may be associated with fracture risk (9, 10), but studies have not consistently shown an association with BMD (11, 12).
It is easy to forget that these studies of associations between genes and diseases use the traditional epidemiologic tools of population studies. Investigators have the same concerns associated with any epidemiologic study: having appropriate design and analytic approaches, sufficient sample size and statistical power, and minimal bias and confounding. Despite hundreds of association studies and retrospective meta-analyses of polymorphisms in more than 30 genes that are associated with BMD and fractures, no convincing conclusions have emerged (13). The VDR gene is no exception. To try to address this issue, investigators have reported retrospective meta-analyses of published studies. For example, a recent meta-analysis by Fang and colleagues (14) has shown no relationship between the VDRBsmI or TaqI polymorphisms and fracture risk. However, these retrospective meta-analyses typically have significant between-study heterogeneity and biases. Between-study heterogeneity refers to dissimilarity, more than expected by chance, among the estimates of strength of association in the individual studies. Possible causes of dissimilarity include variation in allele frequencies, disease expression, effects of other genetic markers, or disease susceptibility across study samples. Genuine heterogeneity may be difficult to distinguish from the effects of publication or misclassification bias in meta-analyses (15). Lack of standardized genotyping methods and phenotype definitions across studies and publication bias, whereby positive associations are more likely to be published, are major contributing problems to heterogeneity, which in turn makes it difficult to draw conclusions from a body of research.
In this issue, the multicenter association study by Uitterlinden and colleagues (16) has combined individual-patient data from several European prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies. By forming a collaborative consortium, the Genetic Markers for Osteoporosis (GENOMOS) study was able to assess the association of controversial VDR polymorphisms and BMD and fracture risks among 23 926 unrelated men and women. These investigators found that the functional Cdx2 polymorphism was associated with a reduced risk for incident fracture, particularly vertebral fracture, but the small effect was of borderline statistical significance. In contrast to findings of some smaller individual association studies, FokI and the BsmI–ApaI–TaqI haplotype were not associated with BMD or fracture phenotypes.
Genetic Markers for Osteoporosis, the largest collaborative network of studies in osteoporosis genetics, represents a new team approach to quantifying the association between suspected genes and osteoporosis-related outcomes (16). This large-scale prospective approach has key advantages over individual association studies and retrospective meta-analyses. Uitterlinden and colleagues could better minimize between-study heterogeneity and bias by standardizing genotyping methods, outcome definitions, and covariate data collection across studies; controlling for confounding; and improving statistical power to detect modest genetic associations. Moreover, such a large study has greater precision to interpret small effect sizes. When published and unpublished data were included in their collaborative study, concern about publication bias was reduced. In genetic association studies, Mendelian randomization also helps to minimize reporting or selection bias. Mendelian randomization refers to the random assortment of alleles from parents to offspring during conception and gamete formation. This leads to population distributions of genetic variants that are generally independent of environmental factors, which often confound nongenetic epidemiologic association studies.
Reports from GENOMOS indicate that multiple genes have a small or modest effect on osteoporotic fracture risk and that several polymorphisms might affect fracture risk through a mechanism at least in part independent of BMD. To date, GENOMOS has found null to modest associations between fracture-related factors and previously controversial polymorphisms in VDR, estrogen receptor-α (ESR1), and collagen type I-α 1 (COLIA1) (16–18). As Uitterlinden and colleagues noted, the Cdx2 polymorphism and other functional polymorphisms in the VDR promoter region are in linkage disequilibrium, which means that the association of alleles among the polymorphic sites is not random. This finding implies that Cdx2 or the polymorphisms in linkage disequilibrium with Cdx2 affect fracture risk through a mechanism largely independent of BMD. Likewise, some polymorphisms in ESR1 and COLIA1 may be associated with fracture risk, independent of BMD, whereas others are associated with neither BMD nor fracture risk (17, 18).
Large-scale prospective collaborative studies, such as GENOMOS, can identify multiple genes of modest effect and genetic and environmental interactions and provide insights into osteoporosis pathogenesis. Osteoporosis genes are potential future targets for designing new drugs to prevent or treat disease. Susceptibility polymorphisms may aid in assessing persons at high risk or in distinguishing patients who respond to treatment from those who do not. Polymorphisms that are independent of BMD could be used along with BMD to help target preventive therapies to persons at higher risk. The Human Genome Epidemiology Network (www.cdc.gov/genomics/hugenet) is a global collaborative network of consortia formed to prospectively develop and combine knowledge bases on human genetic variants for multiple diseases (19). Recent advances in high-throughput genotyping methods and the influx of validated single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the human genome have now made genome-wide association studies possible (20). In this context, such networks as GENOMOS will facilitate execution and correct interpretation of such studies for osteoporosis and other disease outcomes.
In the next quarter-century, the number of persons affected by osteoporosis and related fractures will double. Understanding the pathogenesis of osteoporosis will require characterizing the interplay among multiple gene variants, gene products, environmental mediators, and bone, which will be an essential step toward discovery of drugs that target the biological mechanism causing osteoporosis. In GENOMOS, Uitterlinden and colleagues show that multicenter collaborative studies are crucial to efficiently and correctly identifying genes involved in osteoporosis and other complex diseases.

References

  1. Looker
    AC
    Orwoll
    ES
    Johnston
    CC
    Jr
    Lindsay
    RL
    Wahner
    HW
    Dunn
    WL
    et al
    Prevalence of low femoral bone density in older U.S. adults from NHANES III.
    J Bone Miner Res
    1997
    12
    1761
    8
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  2. Melton
    LJ
    3rd
    Chrischilles
    EA
    Cooper
    C
    Lane
    AW
    Riggs
    BL
    Perspective. How many women have osteoporosis?
    J Bone Miner Res
    1992
    7
    1005
    10
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  3. Stone
    KL
    Seeley
    DG
    Lui
    LY
    Cauley
    JA
    Ensrud
    K
    Browner
    WS
    et al
    BMD at multiple sites and risk of fracture of multiple types: long-term results from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures.
    J Bone Miner Res
    2003
    18
    1947
    54
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  4. Cummings
    SR
    Nevitt
    MC
    Browner
    WS
    Stone
    K
    Fox
    KM
    Ensrud
    KE
    et al
    Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.
    N Engl J Med
    1995
    332
    767
    73
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  5. Peacock
    M
    Turner
    CH
    Econs
    MJ
    Foroud
    T
    Genetics of osteoporosis.
    Endocr Rev
    2002
    23
    303
    26
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  6. Morrison
    NA
    Qi
    JC
    Tokita
    A
    Kelly
    PJ
    Crofts
    L
    Nguyen
    TV
    et al
    Prediction of bone density from vitamin D receptor alleles.
    Nature
    1994
    367
    284
    7
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  7. Liu
    YZ
    Liu
    YJ
    Recker
    RR
    Deng
    HW
    Molecular studies of identification of genes for osteoporosis: the 2002 update.
    J Endocrinol
    2003
    177
    147
    96
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  8. Zmuda
    JM
    Cauley
    JA
    Ferrell
    RE
    Molecular epidemiology of vitamin D receptor gene variants.
    Epidemiol Rev
    2000
    22
    203
    17
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  9. Fang
    Y
    van Meurs
    JB
    Bergink
    AP
    Hofman
    A
    van Duijn
    CM
    van Leeuwen
    JP
    et al
    Cdx-2 polymorphism in the promoter region of the human vitamin D receptor gene determines susceptibility to fracture in the elderly.
    J Bone Miner Res
    2003
    18
    1632
    41
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  10. Arai
    H
    Miyamoto
    KI
    Yoshida
    M
    Yamamoto
    H
    Taketani
    Y
    Morita
    K
    et al
    The polymorphism in the caudal-related homeodomain protein Cdx-2 binding element in the human vitamin D receptor gene.
    J Bone Miner Res
    2001
    16
    1256
    64
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  11. Macdonald
    HM
    McGuigan
    FE
    Stewart
    A
    Black
    AJ
    Fraser
    WD
    Ralston
    S
    et al
    Large-scale population-based study shows no evidence of association between common polymorphism of the VDR gene and BMD in British women.
    J Bone Miner Res
    2006
    21
    151
    62
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  12. Morita
    A
    Iki
    M
    Dohi
    Y
    Ikeda
    Y
    Kagamimori
    S
    Kagawa
    Y
    et al
    Effects of the Cdx-2 polymorphism of the vitamin D receptor gene and lifestyle factors on bone mineral density in a representative sample of Japanese women: the Japanese Population-based Osteoporosis (JPOS) Study.
    Calcif Tissue Int
    2005
    77
    339
    47
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  13. Shen
    H
    Liu
    Y
    Liu
    P
    Recker
    RR
    Deng
    HW
    Nonreplication in genetic studies of complex diseases—lessons learned from studies of osteoporosis and tentative remedies.
    J Bone Miner Res
    2005
    20
    365
    76
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  14. Fang
    Y
    Rivadeneira
    F
    van Meurs
    JB
    Pols
    HA
    Ioannidis
    JP
    Uitterlinden
    AG
    Vitamin D receptor gene BsmI and TaqI polymorphisms and fracture risk: a meta-analysis.
    Bone
    2006
    .
    PubMed
  15. Ioannidis
    JP
    Trikalinos
    TA
    Ntzani
    EE
    Contopoulos-Ioannidis
    DG
    Genetic associations in large versus small studies: an empirical assessment.
    Lancet
    2003
    361
    567
    71
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  16. Uitterlinden
    AG
    Ralston
    SH
    Brandi
    ML
    Carey
    AH
    Grinberg
    D
    Langdahl
    BL
    et al
    The association between common vitamin D receptor gene variations and osteoporosis: a participant-level meta-analysis.
    Ann Intern Med
    2006
    145
    255
    64
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  17. Ioannidis
    JP
    Ralston
    SH
    Bennett
    ST
    Brandi
    ML
    Grinberg
    D
    Karassa
    FB
    et al
    Differential genetic effects of ESR1 gene polymorphisms on osteoporosis outcomes.
    JAMA
    2004
    292
    2105
    14
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  18. Ralston
    SH
    Uitterlinden
    AG
    Brandi
    ML
    Balcells
    S
    Langdahl
    BL
    Lips
    P
    et al
    Large-scale evidence for the effect of the COLIA1 Sp1 polymorphism on osteoporosis outcomes: the GENOMOS study.
    PLoS Med
    2006
    3
    90
    .
    PubMed
    CrossRef
  19. Ioannidis
    JP
    Gwinn
    M
    Little
    J
    Higgins
    JP
    Bernstein
    JL
    Boffetta
    P
    et al
    A road map for efficient and reliable human genome epidemiology.
    Nat Genet
    2006
    38
    3
    5
    PubMed
    CrossRef
    PubMed
  20. Zmuda
    JM
    Sheu
    YT
    Moffett
    SP
    The search for human osteoporosis genes.
    J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact
    2006
    6
    3
    15
    PubMed
    PubMed

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

This feature is available only to Registered Users

Subscribe/Learn More
Submit a Comment

0 Comments

PDF
Not Available
Citations
Citation

Lee JS, Tucker MA. Making Sense of Puzzling Genetic Association Studies: A Team Approach. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:302–304. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-4-200608150-00012

Download citation file:

  • RIS (Zotero)
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • Medlars
  • ProCite
  • RefWorks
  • Reference Manager

© 2018

×
Permissions

Published: Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(4):302-304.

DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-4-200608150-00012

2 Citations

Related Articles

Collaborative Meta-analysis: Associations of 150 Candidate Genes With Osteoporosis and Osteoporotic Fracture
Annals of Internal Medicine; 151 (8): 528-537
In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, romosozumab followed by alendronate reduced fractures vs alendronate alone
Annals of Internal Medicine; 168 (2): JC3
Review: Osteoporosis drugs may improve BMD and reduce fractures in some patients with CKD
Annals of Internal Medicine; 167 (4): JC19
Treatment of Low Bone Density or Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures in Men and Women: A Clinical Practice Guideline Update From the American College of Physicians
Annals of Internal Medicine; 166 (11): 818-839
View MoreView Less

Journal Club

In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, romosozumab followed by alendronate reduced fractures vs alendronate alone
Annals of Internal Medicine; 168 (2): JC3
Review: Osteoporosis drugs may improve BMD and reduce fractures in some patients with CKD
Annals of Internal Medicine; 167 (4): JC19
Review: Teriparatide reduces fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 157 (6): JC3-4
Tibolone reduced risk for fractures and breast cancer but increased risk for stroke in older women with osteoporosis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 149 (10): JC5-8
View MoreView Less

Related Point of Care

Osteoporosis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 167 (3): ITC17-ITC32
Osteoporosis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 155 (1): ITC1-1
Hip Fracture
Annals of Internal Medicine; 155 (11): ITC6-1
View MoreView Less

Related Topics

Endocrine and Metabolism
Metabolic Bone Disorders

Endocrine and Metabolism, Metabolic Bone Disorders.

PubMed Articles

How Can We Improve Osteoporosis Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Quality Improvement Strategies for Osteoporosis.
J Bone Miner Res 2018.
Hypomagnesemia During Teriparatide Treatment in Osteoporosis: Incidence and Determinants.
J Bone Miner Res 2018.
View More

Results provided by: PubMed

CME/MOC Activity Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
The Comments Feature Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
link to top

Content

  • Home
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives

Information For

  • Author Info
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Readers
  • Institutions / Libraries / Agencies
  • Advertisers

Services

  • Subscribe
  • Renew
  • Alerts
  • Current Issue RSS
  • Online First RSS
  • In the Clinic RSS
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • Help
  • About Annals
  • About Mobile
  • Patient Information
  • Teaching Tools
  • Annals in the News
  • Share Your Feedback

Awards

  • Personae Photography Prize
  • Junior Investigator Awards
  • Poetry Prize

Other Resources

  • ACP Online
  • Career Connection
  • ACP Advocate Blog
  • ACP Journal Wise

Follow Annals On

  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
acp link acp
silverchair link silverchair

Copyright © 2018 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704

Privacy Policy

|

Conditions of Use

×

You need a subscription to this content to use this feature.

×
PDF Downloads Require Access to the Full Article.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
Annals of Internal Medicine
PURCHASE OPTIONS
Buy This Article|Subscribe
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
Access to this Free Content Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In. Please Choose One of the Following Options
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×