• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Using meta–analysis to explain the diversity of results in genetic studies of late–onset Alzheimer’s disease and to identify high–risk subgroups

    Author(s)
    Lehmann, DJ
    Williams, J
    McBroom, J
    Smith, AD
    Griffith University Author(s)
    McBroom, James
    Year published
    2001
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    In late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, there is a puzzling inconsistency between the findings of case-control studies of most proposed risk genes, except apolipoprotein E ϵ4. This inconsistency may stem from the failure to define the genetic and non-genetic interactions that affect the disease association of each particular susceptibility gene. Such interactions will limit the influence of the gene to a ‘relevant subset’ of vulnerable people. The relevant subsets for many risk genes will be narrow, compared to that of apolipoprotein E ϵ4. Studies may therefore miss the association or even suggest that a risk gene is protective. ...
    View more >
    In late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, there is a puzzling inconsistency between the findings of case-control studies of most proposed risk genes, except apolipoprotein E ϵ4. This inconsistency may stem from the failure to define the genetic and non-genetic interactions that affect the disease association of each particular susceptibility gene. Such interactions will limit the influence of the gene to a ‘relevant subset’ of vulnerable people. The relevant subsets for many risk genes will be narrow, compared to that of apolipoprotein E ϵ4. Studies may therefore miss the association or even suggest that a risk gene is protective. In these circumstances, the precise composition of a cohort is critical and defining the relevant subset is crucial. We illustrate how such definition may be achieved through meta-analysis. We take as an example the butyrylcholinesterase K variant, whose association with Alzheimer’s disease may now be provisionally defined. This analysis leads to the identification of a potentially high-risk group: over 75 year old male carriers of both apolipoprotein E ϵ4 and butyrylcholinesterase K variant.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Neuroscience
    Volume
    108
    Issue
    4
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4522(01)00464-X
    Subject
    Neurosciences
    Cognitive and computational psychology
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/58344
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander