Cited by 1,857Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Systematic meta-analyses of Alzheimer disease genetic association studies: the AlzGene database

Bertram, Lars, McQueen, Matthew B, Mullin, Kristina, Blacker, Deborah, Tanzi, Rudolph E·2007·Nature Genetics

Abstract

The past decade has witnessed hundreds of reports declaring or refuting genetic association with putative Alzheimer disease susceptibility genes. This wealth of information has become increasingly difficult to follow, much less interpret. We have created a publicly available, continuously updated database that comprehensively catalogs all genetic association studies in the field of Alzheimer disease (http://www.alzgene.org). We performed systematic meta-analyses for each polymorphism with available genotype data in at least three case-control samples. In addition to identifying the epsilon4 allele of APOE and related effects, we pinpointed over a dozen potential Alzheimer disease susceptibility genes (ACE, CHRNB2, CST3, ESR1, GAPDHS, IDE, MTHFR, NCSTN, PRNP, PSEN1, TF, TFAM and TNF) with statistically significant allelic summary odds ratios (ranging from 1.11-1.38 for risk alleles and 0.92-0.67 for protective alleles). Our database provides a powerful tool for deciphering the genetics of Alzheimer disease, and it serves as a potential model for tracking the most viable gene candidates in other genetically complex diseases.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ng1934

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bertram, L., McQueen, M. B., Mullin, K., Blacker, D., & Tanzi, R. E.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Bertram, Lars
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2007-01
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
17-23
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W2017079501
Cited by
1,857
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 91 · 2018: 109 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 99 · 2015: 82 · 2014: 134 · 2013: 135 · 2012: 144
FWCI
62.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD060726)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, genetic association studies, susceptibility genes, APOE ε4, polymorphism, case-control study, odds ratio, ACE, CHRNB2, presenilin 1, MTHFR, TFAM, TF
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Humans, Genetic Linkage, Polymorphism, Genetic, Genetic Heterogeneity, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Databases, Genetic, Apolipoprotein E4

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