Molecular genetics of addiction and related heritable phenotypes: genome-wide association approaches identify "connectivity constellation" and drug target genes with pleiotropic effects
Uhl GR, Drgon T, Johnson C, Li CY, Contoreggi C, Hess J, Naiman D, Liu QR.. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2008-10-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Genome-wide association (GWA) can elucidate molecular genetic bases for human individual differences in complex phenotypes that include vulnerability to addiction. Here, we review (a) evidence that supports polygenic models with (at least) modest heterogeneity for the genetic architectures of addiction and several related phenotypes; (b) technical and ethical aspects of importance for understanding GWA data, including genotyping in individual samples versus DNA pools, analytic approaches, power estimation, and ethical issues in genotyping individuals with illegal behaviors; (c) the samples and the data that shape our current understanding of the molecular genetics of individual differences in vulnerability to substance dependence and related phenotypes; (d) overlaps between GWA data sets for dependence on different substances; and (e) overlaps between GWA data for addictions versus other heritable, brain-based phenotypes that include bipolar disorder, cognitive ability, frontal lobe brain volume, the ability to successfully quit smoking, neuroticism, and Alzheimer's disease. These convergent results identify potential targets for drugs that might modify addictions and play roles in these other phenotypes. They add to evidence that individual differences in the quality and quantity of brain connections make pleiotropic contributions to individual differences in vulnerability to addictions and to related brain disorders and phenotypes. A "connectivity constellation" of brain phenotypes and disorders appears to receive substantial pathogenic contributions from individual differences in a constellation of genes whose variants provide individual differences in the specification of brain connectivities during development and in adulthood. Heritable brain differences that underlie addiction vulnerability thus lie squarely in the midst of the repertoire of heritable brain differences that underlie vulnerability to other common brain disorders and phenotypes.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Uhl, G. R., Drgon, T., Johnson, C., Li, C. Y., Contoreggi, C., Hess, J., et al. (2008). Molecular genetics of addiction and related heritable phenotypes: genome-wide association approaches identify "connectivity constellation" and drug target genes with pleiotropic effects. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1441.018
Vancouver
Uhl GR, Drgon T, Johnson C, Li CY, Contoreggi C, Hess J, et al. Molecular genetics of addiction and related heritable phenotypes: genome-wide association approaches identify "connectivity constellation" and drug target genes with pleiotropic effects. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2008. doi:10.1196/annals.1441.018. PMID: 18991966.
BibTeX
@article{uhl2008-18991966,
author = {Uhl, G. R. and Drgon, T. and Johnson, C. and Li, C. Y. and Contoreggi, C. and Hess, J. and Naiman, D. and Liu, Q. R.},
title = {{Molecular genetics of addiction and related heritable phenotypes: genome-wide association approaches identify "connectivity constellation" and drug target genes with pleiotropic effects}},
journal = {Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences},
year = {2008},
doi = {10.1196/annals.1441.018},
pmid = {18991966},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1441.018}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Here, we review (a) evidence that supports polygenic models with (at least) modest heterogeneity for the genetic architectures of addiction and several related phenotypes; (b) technical and ethical aspects of importance for understanding GWA data, including genotyping in individual samples versus DNA pools, analytic approaches, power estimation, and ethical issues in genotyping individuals with illegal behaviors; (c) the samples and the data that shape our current understanding of the molecular genetics of individual differences in vulnerability to substance dependence and related phenotypes; (d) overlaps between GWA data sets for dependence on different substances; and (e) overlaps between GWA data for addictions versus other heritable, brain-based phenotypes that include bipolar disorder, cognitive ability, frontal lobe brain volume, the ability to successfully quit smoking, neuroticism, and Alzheimer's disease.
- These convergent results identify potential targets for drugs that might modify addictions and play roles in these other phenotypes.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2008 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18991966) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Genetics
Also tagged “drug-target”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “drug-target”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.