Publications

Abstract

The molecular, developmental, and evolutionary bases of human brain asymmetry are almost completely unknown. Genetic linkage and association mapping have pin-pointed a gene called LRRTM1 (leucine-rich repeat transmembrane neuronal 1) that may contribute to variability in human handedness. Here I describe how LRRTM1's involvement in handedness was discovered, and also the latest knowledge of its functions in brain development and disease. The association of LRRTM1 with handedness was derived entirely from the paternally inherited gene, and follow-up analysis of gene expression confirmed that LRRTM1 is one of a small number of genes that are imprinted in the human genome, for which the maternally inherited copy is suppressed. The same variation at LRRTM1 that was associated paternally with mixed-/left-handedness was also over-transmitted paternally to schizophrenic patients in a large family study.
LRRTM1 is expressed in specific regions of the developing and adult forebrain by post-mitotic neurons, and the protein may be involved in axonal trafficking. Thus LRRTM1 has a probable role in neurodevelopment, and its association with handedness suggests that one of its functions may be in establishing or consolidating human brain asymmetry.
LRRTM1 is the first gene for which allelic variation has been associated with human handedness. The genetic data also suggest indirectly that the epigenetic regulation of this gene may yet prove more important than DNA sequence variation for influencing brain development and disease.
Intriguingly, the parent-of-origin activity of LRRTM1 suggests that men and women have had conflicting interests in relation to the outcome of lateralized brain development in their offspring.

Abstract

Francks et al. (2007) performed a recent study in which the first putative genetic effect on human handedness was identified (the imprinted locus LRRTM1 on human chromosome 2). In this issue of Laterality, Tim Crow and colleagues present a critique of that study. The present paper presents a personal response to that critique which argues that Francks et al. (2007) published a substantial body of evidence implicating LRRTM1 in handedness and schizophrenia. Progress will now be achieved by others trying to validate, refute, or extend those findings, rather than by further armchair discussion.

Abstract

We report a genome-wide assessment of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in schizophrenia. We investigated SNPs using 871 patients and 863 controls, following up the top hits in four independent cohorts comprising 1,460 patients and 12,995 controls, all of European origin. We found no genome-wide significant associations, nor could we provide support for any previously reported candidate gene or genome-wide associations. We went on to examine CNVs using a subset of 1,013 cases and 1,084 controls of European ancestry, and a further set of 60 cases and 64 controls of African ancestry. We found that eight cases and zero controls carried deletions greater than 2 Mb, of which two, at 8p22 and 16p13.11-p12.4, are newly reported here. A further evaluation of 1,378 controls identified no deletions greater than 2 Mb, suggesting a high prior probability of disease involvement when such deletions are observed in cases. We also provide further evidence for some smaller, previously reported, schizophrenia-associated CNVs, such as those in NRXN1 and APBA2. We could not provide strong support for the hypothesis that schizophrenia patients have a significantly greater “load” of large (>100 kb), rare CNVs, nor could we find common CNVs that associate with schizophrenia. Finally, we did not provide support for the suggestion that schizophrenia-associated CNVs may preferentially disrupt genes in neurodevelopmental pathways. Collectively, these analyses provide the first integrated study of SNPs and CNVs in schizophrenia and support the emerging view that rare deleterious variants may be more important in schizophrenia predisposition than common polymorphisms. While our analyses do not suggest that implicated CNVs impinge on particular key pathways, we do support the contribution of specific genomic regions in schizophrenia, presumably due to recurrent mutation. On balance, these data suggest that very few schizophrenia patients share identical genomic causation, potentially complicating efforts to personalize treatment regimens.

Abstract

Bipolar disorder (BP) is a disabling and often life-threatening disorder that affects approximately 1% of the population worldwide. To identify genetic variants that increase the risk of BP, we genotyped on the Illumina HumanHap550 Beadchip 2,076 bipolar cases and 1,676 controls of European ancestry from the National Institute of Mental Health Human Genetics Initiative Repository, and the Prechter Repository and samples collected in London, Toronto, and Dundee. We imputed SNP genotypes and tested for SNP-BP association in each sample and then performed meta-analysis across samples. The strongest association P value for this 2-study meta-analysis was 2.4 x 10(-6). We next imputed SNP genotypes and tested for SNP-BP association based on the publicly available Affymetrix 500K genotype data from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium for 1,868 BP cases and a reference set of 12,831 individuals. A 3-study meta-analysis of 3,683 nonoverlapping cases and 14,507 extended controls on >2.3 M genotyped and imputed SNPs resulted in 3 chromosomal regions with association P approximately 10(-7): 1p31.1 (no known genes), 3p21 (>25 known genes), and 5q15 (MCTP1). The most strongly associated nonsynonymous SNP rs1042779 (OR = 1.19, P = 1.8 x 10(-7)) is in the ITIH1 gene on chromosome 3, with other strongly associated nonsynonymous SNPs in GNL3, NEK4, and ITIH3. Thus, these chromosomal regions harbor genes implicated in cell cycle, neurogenesis, neuroplasticity, and neurosignaling. In addition, we replicated the reported ANK3 association results for SNP rs10994336 in the nonoverlapping GSK sample (OR = 1.37, P = 0.042). Although these results are promising, analysis of additional samples will be required to confirm that variant(s) in these regions influence BP risk.