The myopia susceptibility locus vasoactive intestinal peptide receptor 2 (VIPR2) contains variants with opposite effects

Kim Hung Leung, Shumeng Luo, Regina Kwarteng, Sin Guang Chen, Maurice K.H. Yap, Chien Ling Huang (Corresponding Author), Shea Ping Yip (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Journal article publicationJournal articleAcademic researchpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Myopia is the commonest eye disorder in the world. High myopes are predisposed to ocular pathologies. The vasoactive intestinal peptide receptor 2 (VIPR2) gene was identified as a myopia susceptibility locus by our group and another group. We continued to fine-map this locus. A case-control study was performed in 4 sequential stages with a total of 941 highly myopic subjects and 846 control subjects, all unrelated Chinese. Stage 1 experimentally genotyped 64.4% of the entire cohort for 152 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and Stage 2 the remaining subjects for 21 SNPs. Stage 3 combined the genotypes for 21 SNPs for the entire cohort, and identified one group of high-risk haplotypes and one group of protective haplotypes significantly associated with high myopia. Stage 4 imputed genotypes for variants in the VIPR2 region and identified two independent groups of variants: one group with high-risk minor alleles and another with protective minor alleles. Variants within each group were generally in strong linkage disequilibrium among themselves while high-risk variants were in linkage equilibrium with protective variants. Therefore, the VIPR2 locus seems to contain variants with opposite effects. This is the first study that has examined the genetic architecture of a myopia susceptibility locus in detail.

Original languageEnglish
Article number18165
JournalScientific Reports
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 3 Dec 2019

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The myopia susceptibility locus vasoactive intestinal peptide receptor 2 (VIPR2) contains variants with opposite effects'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this