Cited by 563Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis

Genetics of multiple sclerosis

Dyment, David A, Ebers, George C, Dessa Sadovnick, A·2004·The Lancet Neurology

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is probably aetiologically heterogeneous. Systematic genetic epidemiological and molecular genetic studies have provided important insights. Both genetic and non-genetic (environment, stochastic) factors may be involved in susceptibility as well as outcome, but we have yet to understand their relative roles. Any environmental factor is likely to be ubiquitous and act on a population-basis rather than within the family microenvironment. Taken together, the results of genome screening studies provide strong evidence for exclusion of a major locus in MS. There are, however, many genes that seem to be associated with MS. These include, but are in no way limited to, HLA classes I and II, T-cell receptor beta, CTLA4, ICAM1, and SH2D2A. The future of MS genetics, as for most common complex disorders, will be dependent on the resources available, ranging from biological samples and comprehensive databases of clinical and epidemiological information to the development of new technologies and statistical methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1474-4422(03)00663-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Candidate gene studies in multiple sclerosis produced inconsistent findings.

    “Candidate gene studies in cohorts of tens or hundreds of individuals at the loci encoding T‐cell receptor alpha12, 13 and beta14, 15 loci, the immunoglobulin heavy‐chain genes16, 17 and the gene for myelin basic protein,18, 19 among others, produced inconsistent findings.20, 21”

    From Genome‐wide association studies of multiple sclerosis (2018) · cites this paper as [20]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 128 · Cited by 563

Authors
Dyment, D. A., Ebers, G. C., & Dessa Sadovnick, A.
Affiliations
Centre for Human Genetics (GB)
Venue
The Lancet Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-02
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
104-110
ISSN
1474-4422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2161929126
Cited by
563
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 27
FWCI
5.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Psoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, genetic susceptibility, HLA class I and II, T cell receptor beta, CTLA-4, ICAM-1, environmental risk factors, disease outcome, genome-wide association study
MeSH terms
Antigens, Differentiation, Female, Humans, Genetic Linkage, Major Histocompatibility Complex, Male, Multiple Sclerosis, Risk Factors, Antigens, CD, Genes, T-Cell Receptor beta, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, CTLA-4 Antigen

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review