Open AccessGenetic Determinants of Pelvic Organ Prolapse among African American and Hispanic Women in the Women’s Health Initiative
Author(s) -
Ayush Giri,
Jennifer M. Wu,
Renée M Ward,
Katherine E. Hartmann,
Amy J. Park,
Kari E. North,
Mariaelisa Graff,
Robert B. Wallace,
G.M. Bareh,
Lihong Qi,
Mary J. OʼSullivan,
Alexander P. Reiner,
Todd L. Edwards,
Digna R. Velez Edwards
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0141647
Subject(s) - single nucleotide polymorphism , genome wide association study , medicine , body mass index , gynecology , logistic regression , etiology , genetic genealogy , oncology , genetics , biology , genotype , gene , population , environmental health
Current evidence suggests a multifactorial etiology to pelvic organ prolapse (POP), including genetic predisposition. We conducted a genome-wide association study of POP in African American (AA) and Hispanic (HP) women from the Women’s Health Initiative Hormone Therapy study. Cases were defined as any POP (grades 1–3) or moderate/severe POP (grades 2–3), while controls had grade 0 POP. We performed race-specific multiple logistic regression analyses between SNPs imputed to 1000 genomes in relation to POP (grade 0 vs 1–3; grade 0 vs 2–3) adjusting for age at diagnosis, body mass index, parity, and genetic ancestry. There were 1274 controls and 1427 cases of any POP and 317 cases of moderate/severe POP. Although none of the analyses reached genome-wide significance (p<5x10 -8 ), we noted variants in several loci that met p<10 −6 . In race-specific analysis of grade 0 vs 2–3, intronic SNPs in the CPE gene (rs28573326, OR:2.14; 95% CI 1.62–2.83; p = 1.0x10 -7 ) were associated with POP in AAs, and SNPs in the gene AL132709 . 5 (rs1950626, OR:2.96; 95% CI 1.96–4.48, p = 2.6x10 -7 ) were associated with POP in HPs. Inverse variance fixed-effect meta-analysis of the race-specific results showed suggestive signals for SNPs in the DPP6 gene (rs11243354, OR:1.36; p = 4.2x10 -7 ) in the grade 0 vs 1–3 analyses and for SNPs around PGBD5 (rs740494, OR:2.17; p = 8.6x10 -7 ) and SHC3 (rs2209875, OR:0.60; p = 9.3x10 -7 ) in the grade 0 vs 2–3 analyses. While we did not identify genome-wide significant findings, we document several SNPs reaching suggestive statistical significance. Further interrogation of POP in larger minority samples is warranted.