Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Feb 22.
Published in final edited form as: Twin Res Hum Genet. 2015 Jun 17;18(4):335–347. doi: 10.1017/thg.2015.36

Genome-wide meta-analysis of longitudinal alcohol consumption across youth and early adulthood

Daniel E Adkins 1, Shaunna L Clark 1, William E Copeland 2, Martin Kennedy 3, Kevin Conway 4, Adrian Angold 2, Hermine Maes 5, Youfang Liu 6, Gaurav Kumar 1, Alaattin Erkanli 2, Ashwin A Patkar 2, Judy Silberg 5, Tyson H Brown 7, David M Fergusson 8, L John Horwood 8, Lindon Eaves 5, Edwin JCG van den Oord 1, Patrick F Sullivan, E J Costello 2
PMCID: PMC4762598  NIHMSID: NIHMS750784  PMID: 26081443

Abstract

The public health burden of alcohol is unevenly distributed across the life course, with levels of use, abuse and dependence increasing across adolescence and peaking in early adulthood. Here we leverage this temporal patterning to search for common genetic variants predicting developmental trajectories of alcohol consumption. Comparable psychiatric evaluations measuring alcohol consumption were collected in three, longitudinal community samples (N=2,126, obs=12,166). Consumption repeated measurements spanning adolescence and early adulthood were analyzed using linear mixed models, estimating individual consumption trajectories, which were then tested for association with Illumina 660W-Quad genotype data (866,099 SNPs after imputation and QC). Association results were combined across samples using standard meta-analysis methods. Four meta-analysis associations satisfied our pre-determined genome-wide significance criterion (FDR<0.1) and 6 others met our “suggestive” criterion (FDR<0.2). Genome-wide significant associations were highly biological plausible, including associations within GABA transporter 1, SLC6A1 (solute carrier family 6, member 1), and exonic hits in LOC100129340 (mitofusin-1-like). Pathway analyses elaborated single marker results, indicating significant enriched associations to intuitive biological mechanisms including neurotransmission, xenobiotic pharmacodynamics and nuclear hormone receptors. These findings underscore the value of combining longitudinal behavioral data and genome-wide genotype information in order to study developmental patterns and improve statistical power in genomic studies.

Keywords: alcohol, genome-wide, longitudinal, developmental trajectory, SLC6A1, GABA


Nearly four percent of all deaths worldwide are attributable to alcohol (WHO, 2011). In the United States, alcohol is the third leading preventable cause of death, after obesity and tobacco use (Mokdad et al., 2004). This public health burden is unevenly distributed across the life course with the highest levels of use, abuse and dependence in early adulthood. It is well-established that both alcohol use and alcohol use disorder rates increase markedly across adolescence and into the early twenties (Chen & Kandel, 1995; Harford et al., 2005), after which disorder rates decrease considerably during young adulthood (Harford et al., 2005). In the 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, twelve-month prevalence rates for any alcohol disorders dropped 28% for males and 47% for females from ages 18–23 to ages 24–29 (Harford et al., 2005). During early adulthood, alcohol is the leading cause of death worldwide (WHO, 2011). Clearly, adolescence and young adulthood are critical developmental stages for studying alcohol misuse and its genetic influences (Rutter et al., 1999).

Across a number of measures (e.g., drinking frequency, binge drinking, alcohol abuse or dependence), alcohol involvement is clearly familial and moderately heritable (h2 ≈ 40–60%) (Kendler et al., 2008; Miles et al., 2005; Pagan et al., 2006; Silberg et al., 2003). This finding has led to extensive genome-wide linkage and candidate gene studies to identify specific susceptibility markers. Indeed, a number of risk variants have been identified (e.g., acetaldehyde and alcohol dehydrogenase genes) (Quertemont, 2004), but many others have failed to replicate in independent samples. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) offer comprehensive tests of common genetic variants and have proven successful in characterizing the genetic architecture of many complex diseases (The Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium, 2007). To date, a small body of GWAS have studied problematic alcohol use and related endophenotypes and identified a number of putative risk loci (Bierut et al., 2010; Edenberg et al., 2010; Heath et al., 2011; Schumann et al., 2011; Treutlein et al., 2009). Implicated variants include polymorphisms in PECR (Johnson et al., 2006; Treutlein et al., 2009), a gene cluster on chromosome 11 (Edenberg et al., 2010), PKNOX2 (Bierut et al., 2010), KIA0040 (Bierut et al., 2010; Zuo et al., 2011), HTR1 (Bierut et al., 2010; Zuo et al., 2011) and AUTS2 (Schumann et al., 2011), among others. Particularly compelling evidence has been presented for rs6943555 in AUTS2, which was associated with alcohol consumption in a large meta-analysis (N≈26K), and corroborated by AUTS2 expression data in human prefrontal cortex and murine brain, as well as reduced alcohol sensitivity with AUTS2 homolog downregulation in Drosophila. Such robust findings remain the exception to the rule, however, as most genetic variants implicated in GWAS studies have failed to replicate.

In response to the challenges of genomic studies of developmentally dynamic, difficult to measure substance abuse phenotypes, the NIDA-sponsored Genes, Environment and Development Initiative (GEDI) combines three longitudinal samples of psychiatric/behavioral repeated assessments with genome-wide data generated using a common platform (Illumina Human660W-Quad v1). The project offers several scientific advances. Foremost, harmonized data across three independent samples reduces the risk of study-specific artifacts, facilitating the search for cross-validated, replicated signals (Agrawal et al., 2012). Second, longitudinal data offer multiple statistical and substantive benefits (Adkins et al., 2010). Most fundamentally, statistical models of individual development are unidentifiable without multiple assessments per subject (Singer, 2003). Thus, GEDI’s structure allows genome-wide investigation of genetic risk for longitudinal patterns of alcohol abuse across its principle risk period—adolescence and young adulthood. Next, and crucially, when measuring any outcome with nontrivial measurement error (e.g., alcohol consumption), increasing the number of assessments/subject monotonically increases estimate precision, and consequently statistical power, with dramatic gains when assessments/subject are numerous, as in GEDI (Willett, Singer & Martin, 1998). Modeling all GEDI alcohol consumption assessments (>5 per subject) increases estimate precision >3-fold compared to using only first and last assessments (Willett et al., 1998). Finally, we employ the simple, often overlooked, strategy of improving statistical power by specifying a quantitative outcome—alcohol consumption. The power gains of quantitative versus dichotomous outcome specifications are well-documented (Cohen, 1983), and it has been demonstrated that focusing solely on clinical diagnoses in psychiatric GWAS dramatically decreases power to detect effects (van der Sluis et al., 2012).

Cumulatively, these techniques help maximize power in the current study, which analyzes three longitudinal samples with repeated assessment of alcohol consumption across adolescence and young adulthood (total N=2,126, Obs=12,166). Consumption repeated measurements were analyzed using linear mixed models, estimating individual consumption trajectories (and a longitudinal mean consumption measure), which were then tested for association with Illumina 660W-Quad genome-wide data (866,099 SNPs after genotype imputation and QC). Association results were combined across samples using standard meta-analytic procedures (de Bakker et al., 2008). Top associations were examined for evidence of enriched association to known biological pathways.

Materials and methods

Description of individual studies

The Great Smoky Mountain Study (GSMS)

GSMS is a longitudinal, representative study of children in 11 predominantly-rural counties in southeast United States begun in 1993 (Costello et al., 1996). Three cohorts of children, age 9, 11, and 13 years, were recruited from a pool of ~20,000 children resulting in N=1,420 participants (49% female). Annual assessments were completed with the child and primary caregiver until age 16 and then with the participant again at ages 19, 21, and 24–26 for 9,904 total assessments. These assessments used the Childhood and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (Angold & Costello, 2000) and its upward extension. Informed consent forms were completed for all aspects of data collection and the study protocol was approved by the Duke Institutional Review Board. An average of 82% of all possible interviews was completed across all waves, ranging from 75% to 94% at individual waves. Blood spots collected at each observation were used for DNA extraction performed at Rutgers University Cell and DNA Repository. A total of 784 GSMS subjects, contributing 5,766 repeated alcohol consumption assessments, were analyzed in genome-wide association testing. Study characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the studies

GSMS CHDS VTSABD
Representative population sample? Y Y Y (twins)
Number of data waves 7–10 22 5
Age range from start to most recent wave 9–26 birth-30 8–30
Total phenotyped subjects 1415 1265 2588
Total phenotype repeated observations 9437 6921 5837
Assessment instruments CAPA; YAPA DISC; RAPI; CIDI CAPA; YAFU
DNA source Dried Bloodspots Whole Blood Whole Blood
Subjects removed during quality control 94 22 17
Total number of subjects included in genome-wide association testing 784 739 603
Genotyping Platform Illumina 660W-Quad v1 DNA Analysis BeadChip Illumina 660W-Quad v1 DNA Analysis BeadChip Illumina 660W-Quad v1 DNA Analysis BeadChip

The Christchurch Health and Development Study (CHDS)

CHDS is a longitudinal study of a birth cohort of 1,265 children born in the Christchurch region of New Zealand in 1977 (Fergusson & Horwood, 2001). This cohort involved 97% of children born from April 15th to August 5th, 1977 and has been assessed on 22 occasions to age 30. Data were gathered during face-to-face interviews with subjects and parents, supplemented by data from official records. Signed consent was obtained for all aspects of data collection and the study has been subject to ethical review throughout its history. The present analysis is based on data collected during assessments of the cohort in adolescence (ages 14, 15, 16, and 18) and adulthood (ages 21, 25, 30). The number of subjects assessed at these ages ranged from 953–1,025, representing between 76% and 82% of the surviving cohort at each age. Whole blood was collected from most subjects, but for ~9% of participants saliva samples were used instead (Oragene TM, DNA Genotek Inc., Ontario, Canada). DNA extractions were performed at the University of Otago, Gene Structure and Function Lab. A total of 739 CHDS subjects, contributing 4,959 repeated alcohol consumption assessments, were analyzed in genome-wide association testing.

The Virginia Twin Study on Adolescent Behavioral Development (VTSABD)

VTSABD is an ongoing cohort-longitudinal study of twins born 1974–1983; 1412 families were included in the first wave of data collection, with 3 subsequent waves of data collection occurring at approximately 1½-year intervals, and a 5th wave when participants were in their mid-20s (Simonoff et al., 1997). A sample of 1894 putative twin pairs was ascertained through the state school system and participating private schools in Virginia, and through families who contacted the VTSABD. A total of 1412 families (2775 children) participated (75%). Up to age 18, children and parents completed the Childhood and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment. Parents completed a similar assessment on both twins. After age 18 the twins alone were interviewed using an age-updated interview designed for telephone administration. Whole blood was collected from VTSABD subjects and DNA extractions were completed at Rutgers University Cell and DNA Repository. A total of 603 unrelated VTSABD subjects, contributing 1441 repeated alcohol consumption assessments, were analyzed in genome-wide association testing.

Genotyping and quality control

All samples were genotyped using Illumina Human660W-Quad v1 DNA Analysis BeadChips at the Mayo Clinic. Quality control procedures were applied to each study using R, PLINK (Purcell et al., 2007) and EIGENSOFT (Patterson, Price & Reich, 2006). In each study, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with missing rate>0.01, MAF<0.05, or extreme deviation (p<1E-6) from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium were removed from further analysis. Subjects with missing rate>0.01 or unusual genome-wide homozygosity (|normalized homozygosity rate|>5) were excluded. Sex was investigated using no-call proportions of chr Y SNPs and heterozygosity proportions for chr X SNPs. Mislabeled sex information was corrected after double-checking the original data and subjects with unexplainable results were deleted. In addition, pairwise identical-by-descent (IBD) estimation was evaluated to identify unexpected duplicates and relative pairs. For VTSABD, one subject per twin-pair, selected at random, was retained in the current analysis.

SNP dosages were imputed in each study using MaCH (Li et al., 2010). The imputation reference was HapMap3 CEU (Utah residents with Northern and Western European ancestry) for subjects of European ancestry. Unobserved population admixture due to ancestry is a well-known confound in GWAS (Patterson et al., 2006). To protect against false-positives due to ancestry, we extracted five principal components from each sample to capture population stratification. To improve the efficiency of population stratification principal components analysis (PCA), a subset of independent SNPs was selected using PLINK, with 77155–79517 SNPs analyzed in each study. PCA was applied to the selected SNPs using the “smartpca” module of EIGENSOFT.

Data Analysis

Phenotype modeling

Two longitudinal measures of over-time alcohol consumption were used as phenotypic outcomes. Both measures were derived from repeated assessments of average drinks per week. The first measure, as detailed below, was a developmental trajectory estimate of alcohol consumption (drinks per week) across adolescence and early adulthood (maximum age range: 8–30). Intuitively, this trajectory slope measures the rate at which alcohol consumption increases, starting with no consumption for virtually all subjects in childhood, then increasing at different rates (or remaining flat among non-drinkers) through adolescence and the transition to adulthood, before stabilizing at different levels in the late twenties. The second measure was the simple mean of all alcohol consumption (drinks per week) repeated assessments collected across adolescence and the transition to adulthood (maximum age range: 12–21) for each subject. We selected these two specifications as: (1) the trajectory outcome was derived from the best fitting longitudinal model of the several tested, and maximized power through including all repeated measures, while (2) the mean consumption outcome provided a simpler summary of individuals’ drinking behavior, and thus greater continuity to existing literature (Agrawal et al., 2012; Grant et al., 2009). The mean consumption measure also has the benefit of focusing solely on adolescence and the transition to adulthood—a developmental period of non-normative drinking, which is associated with increased risk of concurrent comorbid psychiatric disorders and future substance abuse and dependence (Rutter et al., 1999).

To generate the developmental trajectory estimates, we applied a method to estimate longitudinal development from all available repeated observations using linear mixed models (van den Oord et al., 2009). This method first determines the optimal functional form of the developmental trajectory, then generates individual trajectory estimates based on the best fitting model, using best linear unbiased predictors (BLUPs) (Pinheiro & Bates, 2000). As this approach takes advantage of all available repeated assessments, it results in more precise estimates than traditional approaches that estimate development using two assessments (i.e., change scores) (Willett et al., 1998). Further, as estimates are based on mixed model trajectory slopes, they are more robust to attrition than competing approaches (Laird & Ware, 1982). This method of estimating outcomes from longitudinal phenotypic assessments is well-established in psychiatric GWAS (Adkins et al., 2011; Clark et al., 2012; McClay et al., 2011a).

In modeling the developmental trajectories, we tested several specifications of age-based longitudinal change including linear and quadratic functions, as well as a series of piecewise plateau models specifying linear change until a given age and flat thereafter (Bollen & Curran, 2005). Model comparisons using likelihood ratio tests for nested models, and BIC/AIC for non-nested quadratic and piecewise models (Burnham & Anderson, 2004), indicated that a piecewise model with alcohol consumption stabilizing at approximately age 28 best fit the data. Thus, the preferred model used to generate our trajectory slope outcome can be written as:

Yti=β00+β10ati+u0i+u1iati+εti

where i and t are subject and assessment occasions, respectively; y is the alcohol consumption for subject i at assessment t; β00 is the overall sample intercept; β10 is the mean age slope coefficient for age specification a which is coded 0 for the earliest age observed in the sample, 1 for second earliest age, and so forth, until reaching the plateau age (~28), after which its value remains constant for subsequent ages; u0i is the subject-specific deviation from that overall sample intercept; u1i is the subject-specific deviation from the mean age slope; εti is the residual for subject i at assessment t. Random effects u0 and u1i were specified orthogonal. The term of interest, u1i, may more intuitively be described as the subject-specific alcohol consumption age trajectory. As subject-level parameters are not directly estimated by the mixed model, they were calculated as BLUPs in a post-estimation step (Pinheiro & Bates, 2000). See Supplementary Material 1 for further phenotypic modeling details.

Genome-wide association and meta-analyses

Genome-wide association testing was performed using PROBABEL (Aulchenko, Struchalin & van Duijn, 2010), GWAS software for use with probabilistically imputed genotype dosages. Tests were specified as linear regressions of additive SNP effects, controlling for the top five ancestral PCA dimensions as covariates. Meta-analysis procedures proposed by deBakker and colleagues (de Bakker et al., 2008) were used to aggregate results across the three studies. Specifically, aggregate beta coefficients and associated standard errors were computed as follows:

β=i[βi/(SEi)2]i[1/(SEi)2]
SE=1i[1/(SEi)2]

where i indexes study number. Given the use of a common genotyping platform (Illumina Human660W-Quad v1 DNA Analysis BeadChips) and genotyping lab (Mayo Clinic), many common pitfalls in GWAS meta-analysis were avoided, including strand orientation mismatches, imputation reference sample heterogeneity, variable QC criteria, etc.

Multiple testing

We used a false discovery rate (FDR) (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995) approach to declare statistical significance. In comparison to controlling a family-wise error rate (e.g., Bonferroni correction), FDR a) provides a better balance between finding true effects versus controlling false discoveries, b) results in comparable standards for declaring significance across studies because it does not directly depend on the number of tests, c) is relatively robust against having correlated tests (Brown & Russell, 1997). FDR is commonly used in high-dimensional applications, including GWAS (Beecham et al., 2009; Dubois et al., 2010; McClay et al., 2011b). We set a FDR threshold of 0.1 for declaring genome-wide significance. This specifies that, on average, 10% of the SNPs declared significant are expected to be false discoveries. Additionally, we discuss suggestive associations at a FDR threshold of 0.2 to reduce the probability of Type II statistical errors, while explicitly noting reduced confidence in these associations. Operationally, FDR was controlled using q-values, which are FDRs calculated using the p-value of the markers as thresholds for declaring significance (Storey & Tibshirani, 2003).

Pathway analyses

Beyond our primary meta-analysis of single marker GWAS findings, we also conducted secondary analyses to determine whether any known biological pathways harbored an excess of SNPs with small p-values. Specifically, to interrogate the data for evidence of enriched association to known biological pathways we conducted pathway analysis using ConsensusPathDB (http://cpdb.molgen.mpg.de/), a human-centric meta-database of functional biological data, compiled from 30 separate public sources of biological interactions (Kamburov et al., 2011). All alcohol consumption-associated SNPs with meta-analysis p<0.01 were matched to the closest gene +25 kb using RefSeq (GRCh37) coordinate information. All implicated genes were assembled into a final non-redundant gene list, comprising 2590 (mean consumption) and 2506 (developmental trajectory) genes. For each of the 4601 reference pathways present in ConsensusPathDB, a hypergeometric test was performed to calculate the significance of the overlap between the genes from our putative susceptibility list and those present in each reference pathway. FDR was implemented to adjust significance for the large number of tests performed.

Results

Single marker GWAS

Table 2 provides details on those SNPs that were genome-wide significant/suggestive (q<0.1/q< 0.2). Figure 1A shows Q-Q plots for meta-analyses. The plots show that the p-values from the GWAS are generally on a straight line, indicating that the p-value distribution generally conforms to the expected null distribution assuming no effects of the markers. However, in both plots, there is also evidence that markers in the right upper corner have p-values smaller than would be expected under the null hypothesis, suggesting true association between these markers and the outcome. The plots also display λ values (i.e., ratio of median observed p-value to the median expected p-value under the null hypothesis) approximately equal to 1 (λ = 0.998 and 1.000), indicating no systematic test statistic inflation and adequate control of population stratification (Supplementary Material 2 for study-specific Q-Q plots). Manhattan plots are provided in Figure 1B, and provide a low-resolution visualization of spatial clustering among association signals. The full set of GWAS p-values considered in this study is available for download at: http://www.pharmacy.vcu.edu/biomarker/resources/supplementary/.

Table 2.

Strongest SNP-longitudinal alcohol consumption associations (q <0.2)

Meta-analysis GSMS CHDS VTSABD

RS # Outcome Q Z P MAF CHR MA MAF N P MAF N P MAF N P Gene Gene Name
rs7031417 Mean 0.01 −5.68 1.4E-08 0.07 9 C 0.07 782 1.0E-04 0.07 738 9.5E-04 0.06 531 1.2E-02 10kb LOC100129340
rs17053864 Mean 0.05 −5.25 1.5E-07 0.09 9 G 0.10 782 7.2E-05 0.09 738 2.4E-03 0.09 531 6.1E-02 yes LOC100129340
rs11710497 Mean 0.05 −5.29 1.2E-07 0.11 3 A 0.10 782 7.2E-04 0.12 738 1.8E-02 0.12 531 5.3E-04 yes SLC6A1
rs7019589 Mean 0.06 −5.17 2.3E-07 0.09 9 T 0.10 782 6.5E-05 0.09 738 3.3E-03 0.09 531 7.1E-02 yes LOC100129340
rs12257178 Trajectory 0.14 −5.04 4.8E-07 0.39 10 A 0.37 784 5.9E-04 0.39 739 7.8E-05 0.40 575 2.8E-01 230kb ADRA2A
rs694424 Trajectory 0.14 −5.01 5.4E-07 0.12 11 G 0.13 784 1.9E-01 0.12 739 4.2E-02 0.11 575 1.8E-08 yes IGSF9B
rs1984450 Trajectory 0.14 −5.15 2.6E-07 0.10 19 A 0.09 784 1.8E-03 0.11 739 4.4E-03 0.12 575 3.4E-03 yes ZNF578
rs7253326 Trajectory 0.14 −5.14 2.8E-07 0.10 19 G 0.09 784 1.8E-03 0.11 739 4.6E-03 0.12 575 3.4E-03 yes ZNF578
rs6778281 Mean 0.15 −4.96 7.1E-07 0.08 3 C 0.07 782 1.1E-03 0.08 738 3.2E-01 0.08 531 5.6E-06 yes SLC6A1
rs4898641 Mean 0.19 −4.88 1.1E-06 0.06 14 G 0.08 782 8.8E-04 0.06 738 8.5E-04 0.04 531 1.1E-01 yes MIPOL1

Figure 1.

Figure 1

A) QQ plots and B) Manhattan plots for GWAS results of two longitudinal alcohol consumption measures.

The top significant finding involves three genome-wide significant SNPs (rs7031417: q=0.01, p=1.4E-08; rs17053864: q=0.05, p= 1.5E-07; rs7019589: q=0.06, p=2.3E-07) at pseudogene LOC100129340 (mitofusin-1-like) associated with mean adolescent alcohol consumption. These SNPs show moderately low MAF (~0.09) with minimal MAF differences across the three samples (Table 2). Study specific results show that this meta-analysis association was not driven by a single sample, with GSMS and CHDS exhibiting comparably low p-values (Table 2). Examination of the regional plot for the locus shows a robustly associated haplotype spanning ~100kb with >10 spatially clustered SNPs showing nominal association (Supplementary Material 3A). Notably, one of the genome-wide significant hits is located in the transcribed exon 4.

The second genome-wide significant association, also to mean consumption, is a locus in GABA transporter SLC6A1 (solute carrier family 6 (neurotransmitter transporter, GABA), member 1). In addition to the genome-wide hit in this gene (rs11710497: q=0.05, p=1.2E-07), a second SNP met our suggestive criteria (rs6778281: q=0.15, p=7.1E-07). Again, MAFs were moderately low (~0.10) and highly comparable across individual samples. Also, significance was not driven by a single study, with comparably low p-values for GSMS and VTSABD (Table 2). Inspection of the regional plot indicates a fairly small LD block overlaying exonic regions of SLC6A1. Further, this small linkage disequilibrium (LD) block is highly enriched for strong associations including several nominally associated coding SNPs (p<0.001) (Supplementary Material 3B).

Top findings for the developmental consumption trajectory included a cluster of correlated SNPs about 150kb upstream of ADRA2A (adrenoceptor alpha 2A), with rs12257178 exhibiting the strongest association (q=0.14, p=4.8E-07). MAFs were high (~0.4) and homogenous across studies. Association strength was primarily driven by GSMS and CHDS samples (Table 2). While it is questionable whether this putative susceptibility locus is in LD with ADRA2A, the regional plot does show a correlated SNP located ~80kb upstream of the gene (Supplementary Material 3C). Also, further inspection of the regional plot indicates an unusually wide area of moderately enriched association surrounding the suggestive locus, spanning ~500kb and encompassing ADRA2A.Thus, it is possible that this association may tag cis regulatory elements or genic variants for ADRA2A.

Other top hits included a pair of SNPs in high LD (R2>0.9) within ZNF578 (rs1984450 and rs7253326: q=0.14; p≈2.7E-07) associated with the trajectory outcome, and an interesting spatial pattern of SNPS associated with mean consumption surrounding an intronic SNP in MIPOL1 (rs4898641: q=0.19, p=1.1E-06). The ZNF578 finding exhibits almost exactly the same level of association across studies (p≈3.0E-03) and moderately low MAF (~0.10). Correlated signals overlapped ZNF578 and the adjacent ZNF808 and ZNF701 genes, and tag two nominally significant coding SNPs in ZNF578 (Supplementary Material 3D). Next, rs4898641 in MIPOL1 appears to tag a ~200kb haplotype, enriched for association, which closely corresponds to the gene boundaries of MIPOL1 (Supplementary Material 3E). Our final suggestive finding involved a genic locus in IGSF9B centered on rs694424 (q=0.14, p=5.4E-07) (Supplementary Material 3F). This finding is of lower confidence, however, as its association strength is essentially driven by a single sample (VTSABD).

Pathway analyses

Results from ConsensusPathDB indicated significant involvement of several intuitive biological pathways (Table 3). As ConsensusPathDB is a meta-database bioinformatic tool, it mines multiple individual databases—in the current analysis significant (q<0.1) pathways were found in Reactome, PharmGKB, Signlink and Wikipathways databases (Kamburov et al., 2011). The top pathways, “neuronal system” (p= 2.5E-07, q=4.5E-04) and the related “transmission across chemical synapses” (p=3.7E-05, q=3.3E-02), indicated an association between genetic variation in neurotransmission and individual differences in mean adolescent alcohol consumption, with disproportionate representation of GABAergic and glutamatergic genes in both of these pathways. Other significant pathways for mean adolescent consumption including “nuclear hormone receptors” (p=2.6E-04, q=9.4E-02), “celecoxib pharmacodynamics” and “adherens junctions interactions” (p=2.1E-04, q=9.4E-02) (Table 3). The three significant pathways for the developmental consumption trajectory indicated more general developmental themes, with specific findings including “developmental biology” (p=7.6E-05, q=8.1E-02), “G protein signaling pathways” (p=1.1E-04, q=8.1E-02) and “axon guidance” (p=1.3E-04, q=8.1E-02).

Table 3.

ConsensusPathDB pathway results for all SNPs within genes nominally associated (p<0.01) with longitudinal alcohol consumption

Pathway P q Database Associated genes from GWAS in pathway
Mean Consumption
Neuronal System 2.5E-07 4.5E-04 Reactome SLC6A1; KCNC1; KCNC2; GABRG3; GABRG2; HSPA8; KCNG4; GRIK5; GLUL; SLC5A7; GABRB3; AP2B1; GRIP2; CALM2; CALM3; KCNG1; CACNB2; CACNA1B; CHRNB2; KCNMA1; PRKCB; GAD1; GRIA2; KCNS3; ABCC8; GABBR2; RIMS1; PLCB1; KCNJ11; GRIA1; VAMP1; KCNQ5; KCNAB1; RPS6KA2; KCNQ1; CHRNA4; KCNH8; KCNN1; CACNG4; CACNA2D3; CACNA2D1; KCNG3; KCNJ6; ADCY4; ACTN2; KCNH7; KCNMB2; KCNH1; KCNMB4; RASGRF2; GRIK1; HCN4; GJD2; GRIN2B; GNG7; CACNA1E; GNG2; SLC1A2; GRIP1; CACNG3; SYN2; SYN3; GNG8
Transmission across Chemical Synapses 3.7E-05 3.3E-02 Reactome SLC6A1; GABRG3; GABRG2; HSPA8; GLUL; SLC5A7; GABBR2; GAD1; GABRB3; CALM2; CALM3; CACNB2; CACNA1B; CHRNB2; CACNA1E; AP2B1; GRIA2; RIMS1; PLCB1; GRIA1; PRKCB; CHRNA4; CACNA2D3; CACNA2D1; ADCY4; ACTN2; RPS6KA2; GRIP2; KCNJ6; RASGRF2; SYN2; GRIK5; GRIN2B; GNG7; GNG2; SLC1A2; GRIK1; GRIP1; CACNG3; CACNG4; SYN3; GNG8
Celecoxib Pathway, Pharmacodynamics 1.9E-04 9.4E-02 PharmGKB PDK1; CACNA2D1; TBXAS1; PTGIR; CACNA1I; CACNB2; CACNA1B; KCNQ5; PTGER1; CACNA1E; KCNQ1; CTNNB1; CACNA1C; PTGS2; CACNA2D3; PLA2G4A; CACNA1S
Adherens junctions interactions 2.1E-04 9.4E-02 Reactome CDH11; CDH10; CDH13; CDH12; CTNNB1; PVRL2; CDH2; CDH6; CADM2; CDH4; CADM1
Nuclear Hormone Receptors 2.6E-04 9.4E-02 Signalink NR3C2; ESRRG; RARG; ESR1; HNF4A; HNF4G; NR4A1; NR2F1; RXRA; ESRRB; THRB; NR2C1; RORA; SMAD3; NR5A2
Developmental Trajectory
Developmental Biology 7.6E-05 8.1E-02 Reactome ITGA9; ROBO2; CDH15; NRP2; SCN5A; NRCAM; ITGA1; HRAS; DOCK1; PCSK6; TRIO; CTNNB1; MAP2K1; CSNK2A1P; MED6; DNM3; CHL1; STIP1; CACNA1G; PITPNA; NCAM1; SPTBN1; FURIN; NCOA3; PRNP; BOC; CACNB2; CACNA1C; CACNA1D; TLN1; MED15; SLIT1; SCN4A; CDH2; CDH4; EPHB2; LAMA1; ACVR2B; RAC2; SIAH1; CRMP1; UNC5A; SCN8A; COL9A1; PPARG; CLTA; COL5A1; ABLIM1; FES; ABLIM2; CTNNA2; KIAA1598; SEMA5A; ROBO1; PLXNA2; VAV2; ST8SIA2; ROCK2; PLXNA4; MEF2C; CDON; ANK3; NTN1; CNTN6; PAK7; SCN3B; MYO10
G Protein Signaling Pathways 1.1E-04 8.1E-02 Wikipathways GNAO1; HRAS; PDE1C; PRKCA; PRKCH; GNB5; PRKCE; GNB2; PRKCZ; PRKAR1A; ITPR1; AKAP1; KCNJ3; AKAP5; AKAP6; AKAP7; ADCY1; AKAP2; ADCY9; GNA14; GNGT2; PPP3CA; PDE4B; PDE4D
Axon guidance 1.3E-04 8.1E-02 Reactome ITGA9; ROBO2; SCN5A; NRCAM; ITGA1; HRAS; DOCK1; MAP2K1; CSNK2A1P; CNTN6; DNM3; CHL1; STIP1; TLN1; PITPNA; NCAM1; SPTBN1; CACNB2; CACNA1C; PRNP; CACNA1G; SLIT1; SCN4A; EPHB2; LAMA1; TRIO; RAC2; SIAH1; UNC5A; SCN8A; CACNA1D; CRMP1; COL5A1; ABLIM1; FES; ABLIM2; COL9A1; NRP2; KIAA1598; SEMA5A; ROBO1; NTN1; VAV2; ST8SIA2; ROCK2; PLXNA4; ANK3; PLXNA2; CLTA; PAK7; SCN3B; MYO10

Discussion

Developmental perspectives have long stressed the importance of accounting for temporality and life course variation in models of substance abuse. A primary insight of such perspectives is that the importance of various risk factors fluctuates across developmental trajectories (Adkins et al., 2012; Willett et al., 1998). The current study endeavors to wed this perspective to genomic approaches to alcohol consumption. While psychiatric genetics has made advances toward elucidating the link between genetic variation and alcohol involvement, this research has largely been atemporal. The weakness of such static perspectives on the genetic determinants of alcohol involvement is highlighted not only by developmental perspectives, but also by research within genetics showing that epigenetic mechanisms (i.e., methylation, histone modification and chromatin remodeling) regulate gene expression in response to developmental and environmental cues (Whitelaw & Whitelaw, 2006). Using the GEDI GWAS samples, this longitudinal GWAS meta-analysis has addressed the issue of developmental variation in genetic influences across adolescence and young adulthood through genome-wide testing of common variant effects on longitudinal measures of alcohol consumption, employing FDR methods to control the risk of false discoveries.

Our top genome-wide finding involved three SNPs (rs7031417, rs17053864, rs7019589) at pseudogene LOC100129340 (mitofusin-1-like). Very little is known regarding this pseudogene, which was only added in the most recent, hg19, gene track (thus, its absence in the regional plot). However, variants within LOC100129340 were found to be associated with adult human height in a large GWAS meta-analysis (Gudbjartsson et al., 2008). Also, one of the genome-wide significant hits fell within exon 4 of the pseudogene. Given that pseudogenes, by definition, lack protein-coding function, the prior probability of this locus being a true discovery is somewhat diminished. However, considering: a) the association signal is in a transcribed sequence, b) pseudogene transcripts have demonstrated trans-regulation of homologous coding genes (Hirotsune et al., 2003) and c) endogenous siRNA are sometimes derived from pseudogene transcription (Tam et al., 2008), it would be rash to dismiss this result as a false discovery.

Our second genome-wide significant locus was tagged by rs11710497, located within GABA transporter 1—SLC6A1 (solute carrier family 6 (neurotransmitter transporter, GABA), member 1). Given that alcohol functions primarily through binding to GABA receptors, and that this gene encodes protein GAT-1, which removes GABA from the synaptic cleft, there is a notably high prior probability of this being a true discovery. Furthermore, while the two genome-wide significant/suggestive hits were in intronic regions, they tag strongly associated exonic variants in SLC6A1. Although the network biology of the gene suggests obvious links to alcohol consumption, there has been surprisingly little research studying this relationship. Conversely, studies have implicated the gene in anxiety disorders and ADHD (e.g., Lasky-Su et al., 2008; Thoeringer et al., 2010; Thoeringer et al., 2009). This finding should focus future research on the study of SLC6A1 variants in alcohol abuse and other psychiatric phenotypes related to cortical excitability/inhibition.

The strong association of a large region near ADRA2A (adrenoceptor alpha 2A) also provides a promising potential biological mechanism. Alpha-2-adrenergic receptors are members of the G protein-coupled receptor superfamily. These receptors have a critical role in regulating neurotransmitter release from sympathetic nerves and from adrenergic neurons in the CNS. Alpha2A and alpha2C subtypes are required for normal presynaptic control of transmitter release from sympathetic nerves in central noradrenergic neurons, and the alpha2A subtype inhibits transmitter release at high neural stimulation frequencies. This gene encodes alpha2A subtype and it contains no introns in either its coding or untranslated sequences. There is an extensive literature on the gene and many findings suggesting association to ADHD (e.g., Kim et al., 2010; Roman et al., 2005; Roman et al., 2003; Waldman et al., 2006), as well as metabolic traits (e.g., glycemic phenotypes, blood pressure) (for meta-analysis see Talmud et al., 2011) and substance abuse (Clarke et al., 2012; Merenakk et al., 2011; Prestes et al., 2007). Given the neurobiological implications, this gene should be considered a strong candidate in future alcohol abuse studies. The final three genome-wide suggestive (q<0.2) loci were for intronic SNPs in ZNF578, MIPOL1 and IGSF9B and have no reported evidence linking them to alcohol use/abuse phenotypes. Thus, future research will be required to adjudicate whether they are novel susceptibility loci or false discoveries.

Pathway analyses indicated several intuitive biological mechanisms. Top results for mean adolescent consumption (“neuronal system” and “transmission across chemical synapses”) suggested extensive involvement of GABAergic (e.g., SLC6A1, GABRG3, GABRG2, GABBR2) and glutamatergic (e.g., GRIK5, GLUL, GRIK1, GRIN2B) neurotransmission. Given that GABA and glutamate neurotransmitter systems are primary pharmacodynamic targets of alcohol (for review see Vengeliene et al., 2008), these results are consistent with extant knowledge of the drug’s biological mechanisms. “Celecoxib pharmacodynamics” and “nuclear hormone receptors” also offer intriguing biological mechanisms for genetic variation in alcohol metabolism. Celecoxib acts by inhibiting prostaglandin synthesis (Penning et al., 1997). Prostaglandins are lipid autocrine/paracrine mediators with a variety of physiological effects, including inflammation modulation (Hata & Breyer, 2004), which have been shown to moderate alcohol “hangover” intensity (Wiese, Shlipak & Browner, 2000) and reduce alcohol-induced liver toxicity (Nanji et al., 1993). “Nuclear hormone receptors” (NHR) are intracellular proteins responsible for sensing steroid and thyroid hormones and some other signaling molecules. Multiple NHR genes implicated in the current analysis are specifically expressed in liver (e.g., HNF4A, HNF4G) and several others function as thyroid hormone receptors, which have been linked to severity of alcohol craving, consumption and withdrawal (Alfos et al., 1996; Ozsoy et al., 2006).

The three biological pathways significantly associated with the developmental consumption trajectory were broader and more explicitly developmentally oriented, particularly “developmental biology” and “axon guidance”, which shared several implicated genes related to nervous system development (e.g., ROBO1, ROBO2, ANK3). The final significant pathway associated with the developmental trajectory, G-protein signaling, functions as an intermediary messenger system for many hormones, neurotransmitters and other signaling molecules. While G-protein signaling is involved in many biological processes, it is known that alcohol intoxication is directly connected to the actions of four G-protein gated inwardly-rectifying potassium (GIRK) channel subunits, one of which was among the genes implicated in this pathway analysis (i.e., KCNJ3) (Aryal et al., 2009; Lewohl et al., 1999). Despite the general plausibility of these pathway results, it is worth noting that given the incomplete, low resolution nature of current biological databases, findings should be regarded as tentative pending future tests of replication as database content and accuracy continue to improve (Khatri, Sirota & Butte, 2012).

Clearly, it is premature to suggest direct clinical applications of these findings for therapeutic target or biomarker discovery. On the contrary, actualizing the promise of translational genomics and converting academic findings into clinical applications will require a cumulative process of aggregating and jointly considering large bodies of evidence using meta-analytic and data integration techniques. Thus, it is important to rapidly disseminate genome-wide association results from longitudinal behavioral studies with genomic data, such as the GEDI samples. To facilitate this process we provide all p-values (http://www.pharmacy.vcu.edu/biomarker/resources/supplementary/) as a resource for investigators with the requisite samples to carry out replication or further meta-analysis.

As with any genetic associations, our findings will require additional replication and functional validation. However, the present study shows the potential of GWAS meta-analyses of longitudinal data to discover genes and pathways that mediate developmental trends in alcohol consumption. A better understanding of these biological mechanisms and the roles of specific polymorphisms may facilitate the development of improved biomarker-based approaches to personalize substance abuse treatment. It is hoped that this research will eventually contribute to reducing the global health burden of substance abuse by facilitating identification of novel mechanisms, biomarkers and therapeutic targets.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank to the study participants from the Great Smoky Mountain Study, Virginia Twin Study on Adolescent Behavioral Development, and Christchurch Health and Development Study. Also, thanks to Karolina Aberg and colleagues at the VCU Center for Biomarker Research and Personalized Medicine for helpful discussion and sharing analytical resources. Dr. Conway¹s role on this paper is as a Science Officer on U01DA014413, with no involvement in other cited grants. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent the views of NIDA or any of the sponsoring organizations, agencies, or the U.S. government.

Financial support

This research was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01DA024413, R01DA11301), National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH063970, R01MH063671, R01MH048085, K01MH093731 and K23MH080230), NARSAD, and the William T. Grant Foundation. The CHDS was supported by the Health Research Council of New Zealand, National Child Health Research Foundation, Canterbury Medical Research Foundation, New Zealand Lottery Grants Board, University of Otago, Carney Centre for Pharmacogenomics, James Hume Bequest Fund and NIH grant MH077874.

Footnotes

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical standards

The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committees on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008.

References

  1. Adkins DE, Aberg K, McClay JL, Bukszar J, Zhao Z, Jia P, Stroup TS, Perkins D, McEvoy JP, Lieberman JA, Sullivan PF, van den Oord EJ. Genomewide pharmacogenomic study of metabolic side effects to antipsychotic drugs. Mol Psychiatry. 2011;16(3):321–332. doi: 10.1038/mp.2010.14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Adkins DE, Aberg K, McClay JL, Hettema JM, Kornstein SG, Bukszar J, van den Oord EJ. A genomewide association study of citalopram response in major depressive disorder-a psychometric approach. Biol Psychiatry. 2010;68(6):e25–e27. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.05.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Adkins DE, Daw JK, McClay JL, Van den Oord E. The influence of five monoamine genes on trajectories of depressive symptoms across adolescence and young adulthood. Development and Psychopathology. 2012;24(1):267–285. doi: 10.1017/S0954579411000824. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Agrawal A, Freedman ND, Cheng YC, Lin P, Shaffer JR, Sun Q, Taylor K, Yaspan B, Cole JW, Cornelis MC, DeSensi RS, Fitzpatrick A, Heiss G, Kang JH, O'Connell J, Bennett S, Bookman E, Bucholz KK, Caporaso N, Crout R, Dick DM, Edenberg HJ, Goate A, Hesselbrock V, Kittner S, Kramer J, Nurnberger JI, Qi L, Rice JP, Schuckit M, van Dam RM, Boerwinkle E, Hu F, Levy S, Marazita M, Mitchell BD, Pasquale LR, Bierut LJ, Consortium G. Measuring alcohol consumption for genomic meta-analyses of alcohol intake: opportunities and challenges. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2012;95(3):539–547. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.111.015545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Alfos S, Higueret P, Pallet V, Higueret D, Garcin H, Jaffard R. Chronic ethanol consumption increases the amount of mRNA for retinoic acid and triiodothyronine receptors in mouse brain. Neuroscience Letters. 1996;206(2–3):73–76. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3940(96)12455-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Angold A, Costello E. The Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA) Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2000;39:39–48. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200001000-00015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Aryal P, Dvir H, Choe S, Slesinger PA. A discrete alcohol pocket involved in GIRK channel activation. Nature Neuroscience. 2009;12(8):988-U52. doi: 10.1038/nn.2358. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Aulchenko YS, Struchalin MV, van Duijn CM. ProbABEL package for genome-wide association analysis of imputed data. Bmc Bioinformatics. 2010;11 doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-134. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Beecham GW, Martin ER, Li YJ, Slifer MA, Gilbert JR, Haines JL, Pericak-Vance MA. Genome-wide association study implicates a chromosome 12 risk locus for late-onset Alzheimer disease. Am J Hum Genet. 2009;84(1):35–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.12.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 1995;57(1):289–300. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bierut LJ, Agrawal A, Bucholz KK, Doheny KF, Laurie C, Pugh E, Fisher S, Fox L, Howells W, Bertelsen S, Hinrichs AL, Almasy L, Breslau N, Culverhouse RC, Dick DM, Edenberg HJ, Foroud T, Grucza RA, Hatsukami D, Hesselbrock V, Johnson EO, Kramer J, Krueger RF, Kuperman S, Lynskey M, Mann K, Neuman RJ, Nöthen MM, Nurnberger JI, Porjesz B, Ridinger M, Saccone NL, Saccone SF, Schuckit MA, Tischfield JA, Wang JC, Rietschel M, Goate AM, Rice JP as part of the Gene, E. A. S. C. A genome-wide association study of alcohol dependence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2010;107(11):5082–5087. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0911109107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Bollen KA, Curran PJ. Latent Curve Models: A Structural Equation Perspective. John Wiley & Sons; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown BW, Russell K. Methods correcting for multiple testing: operating characteristics. Statistics in Medicine. 1997;16(22):2511–2528. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19971130)16:22<2511::aid-sim693>3.0.co;2-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Burnham KP, Anderson DR. Multimodel inference - understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research. 2004;33(2):261–304. [Google Scholar]
  15. Chen K, Kandel DB. The natural history of drug use from adolescence to the mid-thirties in a general population sample. American Journal of Public Health. 1995;85(1):41–47. doi: 10.2105/ajph.85.1.41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Clark SL, Adkins DE, Aberg K, Hettema JM, McClay JL, Souza RP, van den Oord E. Pharmacogenomic study of side-effects for antidepressant treatment options in STAR*D. Psychological Medicine. 2012;42(6):1151–1162. doi: 10.1017/S003329171100239X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Clarke TK, Dempster E, Docherty SJ, Desrivieres S, Lourdsamy A, Wodarz N, Ridinger M, Maier W, Rietschel M, Schumann G. Multiple polymorphisms in genes of the adrenergic stress system confer vulnerability to alcohol abuse. Addict Biol. 2012;17(1):202–208. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-1600.2010.00263.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Cohen J. The Cost of Dichotomization. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1983;7(3):249–253. [Google Scholar]
  19. Costello EJ, Angold A, Burns B, Stangl D, Tweed D, Erkanli A, Worthman C. The Great Smoky Mountains Study of Youth: Goals, designs, methods, and the prevalence of DSM-III-R disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1996;53:1129–1136. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1996.01830120067012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. de Bakker PIW, Ferreira MAR, Jia X, Neale BM, Raychaudhuri S, Voight BF. Practical aspects of imputation-driven meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Human Molecular Genetics. 2008;17(R2):R122–R128. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddn288. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dubois PCA, Trynka G, Franke L, Hunt KA, Romanos J, Curtotti A, Zhernakova A, Heap GAR, Adany R, Aromaa A, Bardella MT, van den Berg LH, Bockett NA, de la Concha EG, Dema B, Fehrmann RSN, Fernandez-Arquero M, Fiatal S, Grandone E, Green PM, Groen HJM, Gwilliam R, Houwen RHJ, Hunt SE, Kaukinen K, Kelleher D, Korponay-Szabo I, Kurppa K, MacMathuna P, Maki M, Mazzilli MC, McCann OT, Mearin ML, Mein CA, Mirza MM, Mistry V, Mora B, Morley KI, Mulder CJ, Murray JA, Nunez C, Oosterom E, Ophoff RA, Polanco I, Peltonen L, Platteel M, Rybak A, Salomaa V, Schweizer JJ, Sperandeo MP, Tack GJ, Turner G, Veldink JH, Verbeek WHM, Weersma RK, Wolters VM, Urcelay E, Cukrowska B, Greco L, Neuhausen SL, McManus R, Barisani D, Deloukas P, Barrett JC, Saavalainen P, Wijmenga C, van Heel DA. Multiple common variants for celiac disease influencing immune gene expression. Nature Genetics. 2010;42(4):295-U42. doi: 10.1038/ng.543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Edenberg HJ, Koller DL, Xuei X, Wetherill L, McClintick JN, Almasy L, Bierut LJ, Bucholz KK, Goate A, Aliev F, Dick D, Hesselbrock V, Hinrichs A, Kramer J, Kuperman S, Nurnberger JI, Rice JP, Schuckit MA, Taylor R, Todd Webb B, Tischfield JA, Porjesz B, Foroud T. Genome-Wide Association Study of Alcohol Dependence Implicates a Region on Chromosome 11. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 2010;34(5):840–852. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01156.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Fergusson D, Horwood L. The Christchurch health and development study: Review of findings on child and adolescent mental health. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 2001;35:287–296. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2001.00902.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Grant JD, Agrawal A, Bucholz KK, Madden PAF, Pergadia ML, Nelson EC, Lynskey MT, Todd RD, Todorov AA, Hansell NK, Whitfield JB, Martin NG, Heath AC. Alcohol Consumption Indices of Genetic Risk for Alcohol Dependence. Biological Psychiatry. 2009;66(8):795–800. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.05.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gudbjartsson DF, Walters GB, Thorleifsson G, Stefansson H, Halldorsson BV, Zusmanovich P, Sulem P, Thorlacius S, Gylfason A, Steinberg S, Helgadottir A, Ingason A, Steinthorsdottir V, Olafsdottir EJ, Olafsdottir GH, Jonsson T, Borch-Johnsen K, Hansen T, Andersen G, Jorgensen T, Pedersen O, Aben KK, Witjes JA, Swinkels DW, den Heijer M, Franke B, Verbeek AL, Becker DM, Yanek LR, Becker LC, Tryggvadottir L, Rafnar T, Gulcher J, Kiemeney LA, Kong A, Thorsteinsdottir U, Stefansson K. Many sequence variants affecting diversity of adult human height. Nat Genet. 2008;40(5):609–615. doi: 10.1038/ng.122. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Harford TC, Grant BF, Yi HY, Chen CM. Patterns of DSM-IV alcohol abuse and dependence criteria among adolescents and adults: results from the 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005;29(5):810–828. doi: 10.1097/01.alc.0000164381.67723.76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hata AN, Breyer RM. Pharmacology and signaling of prostaglandin receptors: Multiple roles in inflammation and immune modulation. Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2004;103(2):147–166. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2004.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Heath AC, Whitfield JB, Martin NG, Pergadia ML, Goate AM, Lind PA, McEvoy BP, Schrage AJ, Grant JD, Chou Y-L, Zhu R, Henders AK, Medland SE, Gordon SD, Nelson EC, Agrawal A, Nyholt DR, Bucholz KK, Madden PAF, Montgomery GW. A Quantitative-Trait Genome-Wide Association Study of Alcoholism Risk in the Community: Findings and Implications. Biological Psychiatry. 2011;70(6):513–518. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.02.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Hirotsune S, Yoshida N, Chen A, Garrett L, Sugiyama F, Takahashi S, Yagami K, Wynshaw-Boris A, Yoshiki A. An expressed pseudogene regulates the messenger-RNA stability of its homologous coding gene. Nature. 2003;423(6935):91–96. doi: 10.1038/nature01535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Johnson C, Drgon T, Liu Q-R, Walther D, Edenberg H, Rice J, Foroud T, Uhl GR. Pooled association genome scanning for alcohol dependence using 104,268 SNPs: Validation and use to identify alcoholism vulnerability loci in unrelated individuals from the collaborative study on the genetics of alcoholism. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics. 2006;141B(8):844–853. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.b.30346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kamburov A, Pentchev K, Galicka H, Wierling C, Lehrach H, Herwig R. ConsensusPathDB: toward a more complete picture of cell biology. Nucleic Acids Research. 2011;39:D712–D717. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq1156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Kendler KS, Schmitt E, Aggen SH, Prescott CA. Genetic and Environmental Influences on Alcohol, Caffeine, Cannabis, and Nicotine Use From Early Adolescence to Middle Adulthood. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008;65(6):674–682. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.65.6.674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Kim BN, Kim JW, Kang H, Cho SC, Shin MS, Yoo HJ, Hong SB, Lee DS. Regional differences in cerebral perfusion associated with the alpha-2A-adrenergic receptor genotypes in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2010;35(5):330–336. doi: 10.1503/jpn.090168. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Laird NM, Ware JH. RANDOM-EFFECTS MODELS FOR LONGITUDINAL DATA. Biometrics. 1982;38(4):963–974. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Lasky-Su J, Neale BM, Franke B, Anney RJ, Zhou K, Maller JB, Vasquez AA, Chen W, Asherson P, Buitelaar J, Banaschewski T, Ebstein R, Gill M, Miranda A, Mulas F, Oades RD, Roeyers H, Rothenberger A, Sergeant J, Sonuga-Barke E, Steinhausen HC, Taylor E, Daly M, Laird N, Lange C, Faraone SV. Genome-wide association scan of quantitative traits for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder identifies novel associations and confirms candidate gene associations. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2008;147B(8):1345–1354. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.b.30867. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Lewohl JM, Wilson WR, Mayfield RD, Brozowski SJ, Morrisett RA, Harris RA. G-protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potassium channels are targets of alcohol action. Nature Neuroscience. 1999;2(12):1084–1090. doi: 10.1038/16012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Li Y, Willer CJ, Ding J, Scheet P, Abecasis GR. MaCH: using sequence and genotype data to estimate haplotypes and unobserved genotypes. Genetic Epidemiology. 2010;34(8):816–834. doi: 10.1002/gepi.20533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. McClay JL, Adkins DE, Aberg K, Bukszar J, Khachane AN, Keefe RSE, Perkins DO, McEvoy JP, Stroup TS, Vann RE, Beardsley PM, Lieberman JA, Sullivan PF, van den Oord E. Genome-Wide Pharmacogenomic Study of Neurocognition As an Indicator of Antipsychotic Treatment Response in Schizophrenia. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2011a;36(3):616–626. doi: 10.1038/npp.2010.193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. McClay JL, Adkins DE, Aberg K, Stroup S, Perkins DO, Vladimirov VI, Lieberman JA, Sullivan PF, van den Oord E. Genome-wide pharmacogenomic analysis of response to treatment with antipsychotics. Molecular Psychiatry. 2011b;16(1):76–85. doi: 10.1038/mp.2009.89. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Merenakk L, Maestu J, Nordquist N, Parik J, Oreland L, Loit HM, Harro J. Effects of the serotonin transporter (5-HTTLPR) and alpha(2A)-adrenoceptor (C-1291G) genotypes on substance use in children and adolescents: a longitudinal study. Psychopharmacology. 2011;215(1):13–22. doi: 10.1007/s00213-010-2109-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Miles D, Silberg J, Pickens R, Eaves L. Familial influences for alcohol use in adolescent female twins: Genetic and environmental interactions. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Vol 66(4)445–451. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 2005;66(4):445–451. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2005.66.445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association. 2004;291(10):1238–1245. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.10.1238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Nanji AA, Khettry U, Sadrzadeh SMH, Yamanaka T. SEVERITY OF LIVER-INJURY IN EXPERIMENTAL ALCOHOLIC LIVER-DISEASE - CORRELATION WITH PLASMA ENDOTOXIN, PROSTAGLANDIN-E2, LEUKOTRIENE-B4, AND THROMBOXANE-B2. American Journal of Pathology. 1993;142(2):367–373. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Ozsoy S, Esel E, Izgi HB, Sofuoglu S. Thyroid function in early and late alcohol withdrawal: Relationship with aggression, family history, and onset age of alcoholism. Alcohol and Alcoholism. 2006;41(5):515–521. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agl056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Pagan JL, Rose RJ, Viken RJ, Pulkkinen L, Kaprio J, Dick DM. Genetic and Environmental Influences on Stages of Alcohol Use Across Adolescence and into Young Adulthood. Behavior Genetics. 2006;36(4):483. doi: 10.1007/s10519-006-9062-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Patterson N, Price AL, Reich D. Population Structure and Eigenanalysis. PLoS Genet. 2006;2(12):e190. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020190. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Penning TD, Talley JJ, Bertenshaw SR, Carter JS, Collins PW, Docter S, Graneto MJ, Lee LF, Malecha JW, Miyashiro JM, Rogers RS, Rogier DJ, Yu SS, Anderson GD, Burton EG, Cogburn JN, Gregory SA, Koboldt CM, Perkins WE, Seibert K, Veenhuizen AW, Zhang YY, Isakson PC. Synthesis and biological evaluation of the 1,5-diarylpyrazole class of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: Identification of 4- 5-(4-methylphenyl)-3-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazol-1-yl benzenesulfona mide (SC-58635, Celecoxib) Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 1997;40(9):1347–1365. doi: 10.1021/jm960803q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Pinheiro JC, Bates DM. Mixed-effects models in S and S-plus. New York, NY: Springer; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  49. Prestes AP, Marques FZC, Hutz MH, Roman T, Bau CHD. Tobacco smoking and the ADRA2A C-1291G polymorphism. Journal of Neural Transmission. 2007;114(11):1503–1506. doi: 10.1007/s00702-007-0769-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MAR, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PIW, Daly MJ, Sham PC. PLINK: A Tool Set for Whole-Genome Association and Population-Based Linkage Analyses. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 2007;81(3):559–575. doi: 10.1086/519795. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Quertemont E. Genetic polymorphism in ethanol metabolism: acetaldehyde contribution to alcohol abuse and alcoholism. Molecular Psychiatry. 2004;9(6):570–581. doi: 10.1038/sj.mp.4001497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Roman T, Polanczyk GV, Zeni C, Genro JP, Rohde LA, Hutz MH. Further evidence of the involvement of alpha-2A-adrenergic receptor gene (ADRA2A) in inattentive dimensional scores of attention-deficit//hyperactivity disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 2005;11(1):8–10. doi: 10.1038/sj.mp.4001743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Roman T, Schmitz M, Polanczyk GV, Eizirik M, Rohde LA, Hutz MH. Is the alpha-2A adrenergic receptor gene (ADRA2A) associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder? American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B-Neuropsychiatric Genetics. 2003;120B(1):116–120. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.b.20018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Rutter M, Silberg J, O'Connor T, Simonoff E. Genetics and child psychiatry: II - Empirical research findings. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 1999;40(1):19–55. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Schumann G, Coin LJ, Lourdusamy A, Charoen P, Berger KH, Stacey D, Desrivières S, Aliev FA, Khan AA, Amin N, Aulchenko YS, Bakalkin G, Bakker SJ, Balkau B, Beulens JW, Bilbao A, de Boer RA, Beury D, Bots ML, Breetvelt EJ, Cauchi S, Cavalcanti-Proença C, Chambers JC, Clarke T-K, Dahmen N, de Geus EJ, Dick D, Ducci F, Easton A, Edenberg HJ, Esko T, Fernández-Medarde A, Foroud T, Freimer NB, Girault J-A, Grobbee DE, Guarrera S, Gudbjartsson DF, Hartikainen A-L, Heath AC, Hesselbrock V, Hofman A, Hottenga J-J, Isohanni MK, Kaprio J, Khaw K-T, Kuehnel B, Laitinen J, Lobbens S, Luan Ja, Mangino M, Maroteaux M, Matullo G, McCarthy MI, Mueller C, Navis G, Numans ME, Núñez A, Nyholt DR, Onland-Moret CN, Oostra BA, O'Reilly PF, Palkovits M, Penninx BW, Polidoro S, Pouta A, Prokopenko I, Ricceri F, Santos E, Smit JH, Soranzo N, Song K, Sovio U, Stumvoll M, Surakk I, Thorgeirsson TE, Thorsteinsdottir U, Troakes C, Tyrfingsson T, Tönjes A, Uiterwaal CS, Uitterlinden AG, van der Harst P, van der Schouw YT, Staehlin O, Vogelzangs N, Vollenweider P, Waeber G, Wareham NJ, Waterworth DM, Whitfield JB, Wichmann EH, Willemsen G, Witteman JC, Yuan X, Zhai G, Zhao JH, Zhang W, Martin NG, Metspalu A, Doering A, Scott J, Spector TD, Loos RJ, Boomsma DI, Mooser V, Peltonen L, Stefansson K, van Duijn CM, Vineis P, Sommer WH, Kooner JS, Spanagel R, Heberlein UA, Jarvelin M-R, Elliott P. Genome-wide association and genetic functional studies identify autism susceptibility candidate 2 gene (AUTS2) in the regulation of alcohol consumption. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2011;108(17):7119–7124. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1017288108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Silberg J, Rutter M, D'Onofrio B, Eaves L. Genetic and environmental risk factors in adolescent substance use. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines. 2003;44(5):664–676. doi: 10.1111/1469-7610.00153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Simonoff E, Pickles A, Meyer JM, Silberg JL, Maes HH, Loeber R, Rutter M, Hewitt JK, Eaves LJ. The Virginia Twin Study of adolescent behavioral development: Influences of age, sex and impairment on rates of disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1997;54:801–808. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830210039004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Singer JD. Applied longitudinal data analysis : modeling change and event occurrence. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  59. Storey JD, Tibshirani R. Statistical significance for genomewide studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(16):9440–9445. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1530509100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Talmud PJ, Cooper JA, Gaunt T, Holmes MV, Shah S, Palmen J, Drenos F, Shah T, Kumari M, Kivimaki M, Whittaker J, Lawlor DA, Day IN, Hingorani AD, Casas JP, Humphries SE. Variants of ADRA2A are associated with fasting glucose, blood pressure, body mass index and type 2 diabetes risk: meta-analysis of four prospective studies. Diabetologia. 2011;54(7):1710–1719. doi: 10.1007/s00125-011-2108-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Tam OH, Aravin AA, Stein P, Girard A, Murchison EP, Cheloufi S, Hodges E, Anger M, Sachidanandam R, Schultz RM, Hannon GJ. Pseudogene-derived small interfering RNAs regulate gene expression in mouse oocytes. Nature. 2008;453(7194):534-U8. doi: 10.1038/nature06904. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. The Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature. 2007;447(7145):661. doi: 10.1038/nature05911. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Thoeringer CK, Erhardt A, Sillaber I, Mueller MB, Ohl F, Holsboer F, Keck ME. Long-term anxiolytic and antidepressant-like behavioural effects of tiagabine, a selective GABA transporter-1 (GAT-1) inhibitor, coincide with a decrease in HPA system activity in C57BL/6 mice. J Psychopharmacol. 2010;24(5):733–743. doi: 10.1177/0269881109103091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Thoeringer CK, Ripke S, Unschuld PG, Lucae S, Ising M, Bettecken T, Uhr M, Keck ME, Mueller-Myhsok B, Holsboer F, Binder EB, Erhardt A. The GABA transporter 1 (SLC6A1): a novel candidate gene for anxiety disorders. J Neural Transm. 2009;116(6):649–657. doi: 10.1007/s00702-008-0075-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Treutlein J, Cichon S, Ridinger M, Wodarz N, Soyka M, Zill P, Maier W, Moessner R, Gaebel W, Dahmen N, Fehr C, Scherbaum N, Steffens M, Ludwig KU, Frank J, Wichmann HE, Schreiber S, Dragano N, Sommer WH, Leonardi-Essmann F, Lourdusamy A, Gebicke-Haerter P, Wienker TF, Sullivan PF, Nothen MM, Kiefer F, Spanagel R, Mann K, Rietschel M. Genome-wide Association Study of Alcohol Dependence. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2009;66(7):773–784. doi: 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. van den Oord EJ, Adkins DE, McClay J, Lieberman J, Sullivan PF. A systematic method for estimating individual responses to treatment with antipsychotics in CATIE. Schizophr Res. 2009;107(1):13–21. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2008.09.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. van der Sluis S, Posthuma D, Nivard MG, Verhage M, Dolan CV. Power in GWAS: lifting the curse of the clinical cut-off. Mol Psychiatry. 2012 doi: 10.1038/mp.2012.65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Vengeliene V, Bilbao A, Molander A, Spanagel R. Neuropharmacology of alcohol addiction. British Journal of Pharmacology. 2008;154(2):299–315. doi: 10.1038/bjp.2008.30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Waldman ID, Nigg JT, Gizer IR, Park L, Rappley MD, Friderici K. The adrenergic receptor alpha-2A gene (ADRA2A) and neuropsychological executive functions as putative endophenotypes for childhood ADHD. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience. 2006;6(1):18–30. doi: 10.3758/cabn.6.1.18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Whitelaw NC, Whitelaw E. How lifetimes shape epigenotype within and across generations. Human Molecular Genetics. 2006;15:R131–R137. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddl200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. WHO. Global status report on alcohol and health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  72. Wiese JG, Shlipak MG, Browner WS. The alcohol hangover. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2000;132(11):897–902. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-132-11-200006060-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Willett JB, Singer JD, Martin NC. The design and analysis of longitudinal studies of development and psychopathology in context: Statistical models and methodological recommendations. Development and Psychopathology. 1998;10(2):395–426. doi: 10.1017/s0954579498001667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Zuo L, Gelernter J, Zhang CK, Zhao H, Lu L, Kranzler HR, Malison RT, Li C-SR, Wang F, Zhang X-Y, Deng H-W, Krystal JH, Zhang F, Luo X. Genome-Wide Association Study of Alcohol Dependence Implicates KIAA0040 on Chromosome 1q. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2011 doi: 10.1038/npp.2011.229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Material

RESOURCES