Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for height and body mass index in ∼700,000 individuals of European ancestry

L. Yengo, J. Sidorenko, K. Kemper, Zhili Zheng, A. Wood, M. Weedon, T. Frayling, J. Hirschhorn et al.

bioRxiv, 2018

700,000 participants · 1,983 citations

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) stand as powerful experimental designs for identifying DNA variants associated with complex traits and diseases. In the past decade, both the number of such studies and their sample sizes have increased dramatically. Recent GWAS of height and body mass index (BMI) in ∼250,000 European participants have led to the discovery of ∼700 and ∼100 nearly independent SNPs associated with these traits, respectively. Here we combine summary statistics from those two studies with GWAS of height and BMI performed in ∼450,000 UK Biobank participants of European ancestry. Overall, our combined GWAS meta-analysis reaches N∼700,000 individuals and substantially increases the number of GWAS signals associated with these traits. We identified 3,290 and 716 near-independent SNPs associated with height and BMI, respectively (at a revised genome-wide significance threshold of p<1 × 10−8), including 1,185 height-associated SNPs and 554 BMI-associated SNPs located within loci not previously identified by these two GWAS. The genome-wide significant SNPs explain ∼24.6% of the variance of height and ∼5% of the variance of BMI in an independent sample from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). Correlations between polygenic scores based upon these SNPs with actual height and BMI in HRS participants were 0.44 and 0.20, respectively. From analyses of integrating GWAS and eQTL data by Summary-data based Mendelian Randomization (SMR), we identified an enrichment of…

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: 700,000 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