Polymorphisms of CR1, CLU and PICALM confer susceptibility of Alzheimer's disease in a southern Chinese population
Chen LH, Kao PY, Fan YH, Ho DT, Chan CS, Yik PY, Ha JC, Chu LW et al.. Neurobiology of aging, 2011-10-19
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
In this case-controlled study, we tested susceptible genetic variants for Alzheimer's disease (AD) in CR1, CLU and PICALM from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in a southern Chinese population. Eight hundred twelve participants consisting of 462 late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) patients and 350 nondemented control subjects were recruited. We found by multivariate logistic regression analysis, that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in CR1 (rs6656401 adjusted allelic p = 0.035; adjusted genotypic p = 0.043) and CLU (rs2279590 adjusted allelic p = 0.035; adjusted genotypic p = 0.006; rs11136000 adjusted allelic p = 0.038; adjusted genotypic p = 0.009) were significantly different between LOAD patients and nondemented controls. For PICALM, LOAD association was found only in the APOE ε4 (-) subgroup (rs3851179 adjusted allelic p = 0.028; adjusted genotypic p = 0.013). Our findings showed evidence of CR1, CLU, and PICALM and LOAD susceptibility in an independent southern Chinese population, which provides additional evidence for LOAD association apart from prior genome-wide association studies in Caucasian populations.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Chen, L. H., Kao, P. Y., Fan, Y. H., Ho, D. T., Chan, C. S., Yik, P. Y., et al. (2012). Polymorphisms of CR1, CLU and PICALM confer susceptibility of Alzheimer's disease in a southern Chinese population. Neurobiology of aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.09.016
Vancouver
Chen LH, Kao PY, Fan YH, Ho DT, Chan CS, Yik PY, et al. Polymorphisms of CR1, CLU and PICALM confer susceptibility of Alzheimer's disease in a southern Chinese population. Neurobiology of aging. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.09.016. PMID: 22015308.
BibTeX
@article{chen2012-22015308,
author = {Chen, L. H. and Kao, P. Y. and Fan, Y. H. and Ho, D. T. and Chan, C. S. and Yik, P. Y. and Ha, J. C. and Chu, L. W. and others},
title = {{Polymorphisms of CR1, CLU and PICALM confer susceptibility of Alzheimer's disease in a southern Chinese population}},
journal = {Neurobiology of aging},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.09.016},
pmid = {22015308},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.09.016}
}
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
- We found by multivariate logistic regression analysis, that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in CR1 (rs6656401 adjusted allelic p = 0.035; adjusted genotypic p = 0.043) and CLU (rs2279590 adjusted allelic p = 0.035; adjusted genotypic p = 0.006; rs11136000 adjusted allelic p = 0.038; adjusted genotypic p = 0.009) were significantly different between LOAD patients and nondemented controls.
- Our findings showed evidence of CR1, CLU, and PICALM and LOAD susceptibility in an independent southern Chinese population, which provides additional evidence for LOAD association apart from prior genome-wide association studies in Caucasian populations.
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 randomized / 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 multicenter 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 (Neurobiology of aging) |
| 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 | 2012 — 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22015308) |
| 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Genetics from nearby years
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.