1. Patients launch a $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
In Brief: The Adrenal Glands and ME
The second in a new series of ‘In Brief’ articles, where Andrew Gladman provides a helpful insight into the science behind fairly common topics, exploring how they relate to ME/CFS. This time he discusses the adrenal glands and why they can be such a talking point ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Looked up top SNP's related to anxiety/OCD - hth!

Discussion in 'Genetic Testing and SNPs' started by kakrpa, Oct 15, 2013.

  1. kakrpa

    kakrpa

    Messages:
    16
    Likes:
    0
    While this is not directly related to ME/CSF, I know some here and/or their loved ones suffer from anxiety/OCD as well (including yours truly), so I thought I'd share a PDF/presentation I stumbled upon that provides insights into the neurobiology of OCD via imaging and genetics.

    Source to the PDF is at the bottom - would also appreciate any insight into how to read my findings (included my 23andme results in parens after each SNP) as I'm not sure how to interpret them. HTH! :)

    SNP:
    rs6131295 (A or G: I am AA on + strand) {-- does this mean my genetic risk is 100%?
    rs10165908 (C or T: I am TT on + strand) {-- does this mean my genetic risk is 0%?
    rs6531002 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)
    rs11611761 (A or C: I am AC on + strand)

    rs11081062 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)
    rs11663827 (A or G: I am GG on + strand)
    rs26728 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)
    rs4868342 (C or T: I am TT on + strand)
    rs297941 (A or G: I am AA on + strand)
    rs11898020 (A or G: I am AG on + strand)
    rs2205748 (A or G: I am AA on + strand)
    rs182320 (C or T: I am CT on + strand)
    rs1838733 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)

    rs297941 (A or G: I am AA on + strand)
    rs9499708 (C or T: I am TT on + strand)
    rs9652236 (G or T: I am GG on + strand)
    rs2205748 (A or G: I am AA on + strand)
    rs485186 (A or G: I am GG on + strand)
    rs6919215 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)
    rs7459733 (C or T: I am CC on + strand)

    Source:
    Neurobiology of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder : Insights from Imaging and Genetics (link is directly to the PDF - refer to p35 within PDF as source of above data)
  2. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    4,742
    Likes:
    5,054
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    kakrpa
    The possible results are simply listed in alphabetical order - A, C, G, T. To determine if one is risky, you need to look it up, either in a summary of the research or by reading the research itself.

    There's also never "100% risk", except for in the mutations that kill people. Usually risk is something like 1.4 times compared to the normal version, or similar. Most SNPs have very small risks associated with them, and the connection between SNPs and disease is often quite uncertain, especially when looking at psychiatric issues.
  3. kakrpa

    kakrpa

    Messages:
    16
    Likes:
    0
    thank you Valentijn - those are the OCD/anx related SNPs listed in the research cited. I then looked up each within my data and appended ea with my result. What I'm trying to understand is which type poses the greater risk...for example on the first SNP, is the risk greater in being homozygous AA *or* GG?

    Perhaps I've misunderstood your response...?
  4. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    4,742
    Likes:
    5,054
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    You have to read the actual paper. A power point slide in pdf form isn't going to give you the data you need. They seem to be citing to Stewart et al., Molecular Psychiatry, 2012 which has an abstract at http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v18/n7/full/mp201285a.html . According to the abstract, no SNPs they looked at were significant at the genome-wide level. So the short answer to your question is: "There is no greater risk from having any specific version of any of those SNPs."

    Their threshold for significance seems a lot more rigorous than usual, but when you're looking at half a million variables (SNPs), odds are good that some will randomly show false correlation. There's no full access to the study, so there's no way to see which version of the SNPs showed potential significance.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page