PICALM gene rs3851179 polymorphism contributes to Alzheimer's disease in an Asian population
Liu G, Zhang S, Cai Z, Ma G, Zhang L, Jiang Y, Feng R, Liao M et al.. Neuromolecular medicine, 2013-04-10
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
PICALM gene rs3851179 polymorphism was reported to an Alzheimer's disease (AD) susceptibility locus in a Caucasian population. However, recent studies reported consistent and inconsistent results in an Asian population. Four studies indicated no association between rs3851179 and AD in a Chinese population and one study reported weak association in a Japanese population. We consider that the failure to replicate the significant association between rs3851179 and AD may be caused by at least two reasons. The first reason may be the genetic heterogeneity in AD among different populations, and the second may be the relatively small sample size compared with large-scale GWAS in Caucasian ancestry. In order to confirm this view, in this research, we first evaluated the genetic heterogeneity of rs3851179 polymorphism in Caucasian and Asian populations. We then investigated rs3851179 polymorphism in an Asian population by a pooled analysis method and a meta-analysis method. We did not observe significant genetic heterogeneity of rs3851179 in the Caucasian and Asian populations. Our results indicate that rs3851179 polymorphism is significantly associated with AD in the Asian population by both pooled analysis and meta-analysis methods. We believe that our findings will be very useful for future genetic studies in AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Liu, G., Zhang, S., Cai, Z., Ma, G., Zhang, L., Jiang, Y., et al. (2013). PICALM gene rs3851179 polymorphism contributes to Alzheimer's disease in an Asian population. Neuromolecular medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12017-013-8225-2
Vancouver
Liu G, Zhang S, Cai Z, Ma G, Zhang L, Jiang Y, et al. PICALM gene rs3851179 polymorphism contributes to Alzheimer's disease in an Asian population. Neuromolecular medicine. 2013. doi:10.1007/s12017-013-8225-2. PMID: 23572399.
BibTeX
@article{liu2013-23572399,
author = {Liu, G. and Zhang, S. and Cai, Z. and Ma, G. and Zhang, L. and Jiang, Y. and Feng, R. and Liao, M. and others},
title = {{PICALM gene rs3851179 polymorphism contributes to Alzheimer's disease in an Asian population}},
journal = {Neuromolecular medicine},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1007/s12017-013-8225-2},
pmid = {23572399},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s12017-013-8225-2}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- However, recent studies reported consistent and inconsistent results in an Asian population.
- We consider that the failure to replicate the significant association between rs3851179 and AD may be caused by at least two reasons.
- The first reason may be the genetic heterogeneity in AD among different populations, and the second may be the relatively small sample size compared with large-scale GWAS in Caucasian ancestry.
- We did not observe significant genetic heterogeneity of rs3851179 in the Caucasian and Asian populations.
- Our results indicate that rs3851179 polymorphism is significantly associated with AD in the Asian population by both pooled analysis and meta-analysis methods.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neuromolecular medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2013 — 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 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| 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 23572399) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Genetics
Also tagged “picalm”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “picalm”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.