Use of genome-wide association studies for drug repositioning (original) (raw)

Nature Biotechnology volume 30, pages 317–320 (2012)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

Over the past few years, large investments have been made in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) with the expectation that some of these studies would lead to the identification of novel therapeutic modalities or allow selection of patients who would respond better to therapeutic interventions. Although the results have provided valuable biological insights for many common diseases, the translation of the genetics findings from GWAS into the clinic remains limited and a topic of intense debate. Among the factors that could explain this situation are that the road from a gene target to an approved marketed drug takes in general more than ten years and most GWAS results have only been obtained over the past four years. Furthermore, because the effect size of the common variants identified by GWAS, alone or in aggregation, is generally modest, the impact in terms of personalized, individually tailored medicine has been negligible. We present here an analysis of another potential application of GWAS data—drug repositioning. In the following study, we assess the utility of GWAS in systematically and rapidly identifying alternative or refined indications for existing drugs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$209.00 per year

only $17.42 per issue

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

Figure 1: Analysis pipeline.

References

  1. Kathiresan, S. et al. Nat. Genet. 40, 189–197 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  2. Franke, A. et al. Nat. Genet. 42, 1118–1125 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  3. Moschen, A.R. et al. Gut 54, 479–487 (2005).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Stefansson, H. et al. Nat. Genet. 41, 277–279 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  5. Clark, L.N. et al. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 18, 838–843 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  6. Louis, E.D. Lancet Neurol. 4, 100–110 (2005).
    Article Google Scholar
  7. Tobacco and Genetics Consortium. Nat. Genet. 42, 441–447 (2010).
  8. Stuart, P.E. et al. Nat. Genet. 42, 1000–1004 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  9. Ormerod, A.D. et al. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 290, 3–8 (1998).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  10. Ormerod, A.D. et al. Br. J. Dermatol. 142, 985–990 (2000).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  11. Welsh, P. et al. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 95, 93–99 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Xu, K. & Coté, T.R. Brief. Bioinform. 12, 341–345 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Nair, R.P. et al. Nat. Genet. 41, 199–204 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  14. Styrkarsdottir, U. et al. Nat. Genet. 41, 15–17 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  15. Zeggini, E. et al. Science 316, 1336–1341 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  16. Imielinski, M. et al. Nat. Genet. 41, 1335–1340 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  17. Barrett, J.C. et al. Nat. Genet. 40, 955–962 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  18. Anderson, C.A. et al. Nat. Genet. 43, 246–252 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  19. Dubois, P.C. et al. Nat. Genet. 42, 295–302 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  20. Baratz, K.H. et al. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 1016–1024 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank K. Peters for helpful comments on this manuscript. T.P. holds a Canada Research Chair and is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). J.B.R. is supported by the CIHR, Ministere Développement Economique, Innovation et Exportation du Québec, Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Québec, Lady Davis Institute of Medical Research.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Michael R Barnes & Vincent Mooser
    Present address: Present addresses: William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK and Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, CHUV University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.,

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computational Biology Department, Quantitative Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Stevenage, UK
    Philippe Sanseau, Pankaj Agarwal & Michael R Barnes
  2. Departments of Human and Medical Genetics, McGill University and Genome Quebec Innovation Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Tomi Pastinen
  3. Departments of Medicine, Human Genetics, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    J Brent Richards
  4. Genetics Department, Quantitative Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, USA
    Lon R Cardon & Vincent Mooser

Authors

  1. Philippe Sanseau
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. Pankaj Agarwal
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  3. Michael R Barnes
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  4. Tomi Pastinen
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  5. J Brent Richards
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  6. Lon R Cardon
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  7. Vincent Mooser
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toPhilippe Sanseau.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

P.X.S. is a full-time employee of GlaxoSmithKline, a pharmaceutical company.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanseau, P., Agarwal, P., Barnes, M. et al. Use of genome-wide association studies for drug repositioning.Nat Biotechnol 30, 317–320 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2151

Download citation

This article is cited by