Skip to main content
. 2016 Dec 5;28(3):981–994. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2016020131

Table 1.

Novel variants associated with eGFRcrea in EA participants from single-variant analysis in stage 1 meeting chip-wide significance (P<3.7×10−7) and associations in stage 2 and combined analysis

Locusa dbSNPID Chr Positionb Variation (Substitution) Stage 1c Stage 2d Combined
A1/A2 (A1 AF) β (SEM) P Value I2 β (SEM) 1-sided P β (SEM) P Value Prop Var Exp (%)
PPM1J rs34611728 1 113255456 c.639G>T (L213F) A/C (0.13) −0.0103 (0.0013) 1.2E-14 13.2 −0.0059 (0.0023) 4.7E-03 −0.0092 (0.0011) 3.3E-16 0.05
EDEM3 rs78444298 1 184672098 c.2236C>T (P746S) A/G (0.02) −0.0183 (0.0034) 5.2E-08 15.3 −0.0225 (0.0055) 1.8E-05 −0.0195 (0.0029) 1.5E-11 0.03
ACP1 rs11553746 2 272203 c.129C>T (T95l) T/C (0.35) −0.0049 (0.0009) 2.0E-07 20.7 −0.0032 (0.0016) 2.2E-02 −0.0045 (0.0008) 1.0E-08 0.02
ORC4e rs2307394 2 148716428 c.233A>G (N78S) C/T (0.32) −0.0058 (0.0010) 6.8E-09 14.3 −0.0025 (0.0016) 6.0E-02 −0.0049 (0.0009) 8.4E-09 0.03
SPEG rs55760516 2 220354108 c.8191A>G (R2731G) G/A (0.33) 0.0059 (0.0009) 4.8E-10 0.5 0.0054 (0.0016) 3.7E-04 0.0058 (0.0008) 1.7E-13 0.04
EYA4 rs9493627 6 133789728 c.829G>A (G223S) A/G (0.31) 0.0061 (0.0010) 2.3E-10 0.0 0.0049 (0.0016) 1.4E-03 0.0058 (0.0009) 1.4E-11 0.04
CYP1A1 rs2472297 15 75027880 intergenic T/C (0.24) 0.0057 (0.0010) 7.0E-08 0.0 0.0059 (0.0017) 3.2E-04 0.0058 (0.0009) 3.0E-11 0.03
ATXN2L rs8049439 16 28837515 intronic C/T (0.40) 0.0048 (0.0009) 1.3E-07 7.1 0.0045 (0.0016) 1.8E-03 0.0047 (0.0008) 1.2E-09 0.03

A1, effect allele; A2, non-effect allele; A1 AF, effect allele frequency; Chr, chromosome; Prop Var Exp, proportion of variance in ln(eGFRcrea) explained.

a

Loci are named according to the closest gene on the basis of the position of the lead SNP for new loci.

b

Position is reported in UCSC Genome Browser build hg19.

c

Sample size for stage 1 analysis: n=111,666.

d

Sample size for stage 2 analysis: n=48,343.

e

This variant reached chip-wide significance (P<3.7×10−7) in the stage 1 samples but did not meet validation criteria in stage 2.