Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies of anxiety disorders

T. Otowa, K. Hek, Minyoung Lee, E. Byrne, S. Mirza, M. Nivard, T. Bigdeli, S. Aggen et al.

Molecular Psychiatry, 2015

18 participants · 386 citations

Abstract

Anxiety disorders (ADs), namely generalized AD, panic disorder and phobias, are common, etiologically complex conditions with a partially genetic basis. Despite differing on diagnostic definitions based on clinical presentation, ADs likely represent various expressions of an underlying common diathesis of abnormal regulation of basic threat–response systems. We conducted genome-wide association analyses in nine samples of European ancestry from seven large, independent studies. To identify genetic variants contributing to genetic susceptibility shared across interview-generated DSM-based ADs, we applied two phenotypic approaches: (1) comparisons between categorical AD cases and supernormal controls, and (2) quantitative phenotypic factor scores (FS) derived from a multivariate analysis combining information across the clinical phenotypes. We used logistic and linear regression, respectively, to analyze the association between these phenotypes and genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms. Meta-analysis for each phenotype combined results across the nine samples for over 18 000 unrelated individuals. Each meta-analysis identified a different genome-wide significant region, with the following markers showing the strongest association: for case–control contrasts, rs1709393 located in an uncharacterized non-coding RNA locus on chromosomal band 3q12.3 (P=1.65 × 10−8); for FS, rs1067327 within CAMKMT encoding the calmodulin-lysine N-methyltransferase on chromosomal band 2p21…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free