ArticleCirculation. Cardiovascular genetics2013
Putting pleiotropy and selection into context defines a new paradigm for interpreting genetic data.
Article in Circulation. Cardiovascular genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- How aging causes osteoarthritis: An evolutionary physiology perspective.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2025Review
- Epigenetic clocks and programmatic aging.Ageing research reviews · 2024Review
- Biological constraint, evolutionary spandrels and antagonistic pleiotropy.Ageing research reviews · 2024Review
- Combined genetic effects of EGLN1 and VWF modulate thrombotic outcome in hypoxia revealed by Ayurgenomics approach.Journal of translational medicine · 2015Article
- Signatures of natural selection on genetic variants affecting complex human traits.Applied & translational genomics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNatural selection shapes many human genes, including some related to complex diseases. Understanding how selection affects genes, especially pleiotropic ones, may be important in evaluating disease associations and the role played by environmental variation. This may be of particular interest for genes with antagonistic roles that cause divergent patterns of selection. The lectin-like low-density lipoprotein 1 receptor, encoded by OLR1, is exemplary. It has antagonistic functions in the cardiovascular and immune systems because the same protein domain binds oxidized low-density lipoprotein and bacterial cell wall proteins, the former contributing to atherosclerosis and the latter presumably protecting from infection. We studied patterns of selection in this gene, in humans and nonhuman primates, to determine whether variable selection can lead to conflicting results in cardiovascular disease association studies. METHODS AND
resultsWe analyzed sequences from 11 nonhuman primate species, as well as single-nucleotide polymorphisms and sequence data from multiple human populations. Results indicate that the derived allele is favored across primate lineages (probably because of recent positive selection). However, both the derived and ancestral alleles were maintained in human populations, especially European ones (possibly because of balancing selection derived from dual roles of LOX-1). Balancing selection likely reflects response to diverse environmental pressures among humans.
conclusionsThese data indicate that differential selection patterns, within and between species, in OLR1 render association studies difficult to replicate even if the gene is etiologically connected to cardiovascular disease. Selection analyses can identify genes exhibiting gene-environment interactions critical for unraveling disease association.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.