<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: gwas</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'gwas'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22gwas%22&t=%22gwas%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:39:56 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Kif 6, Genetic Findings = Useful Medicine 1 in 1000 times</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4045278&amp;cid=t_178715_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F10%2Fkif-6-genetic-findings-useful-medicine.html</link>
            <description>Way back in 2008 I mentioned an article, which I hoped would pan out. Or at least I hoped it would point the way to a model of PGx research which would be followed by pharma and alike to find associations to help us target the right medication for the right patient.While the similar model followed through with Plavix, the initial study did not. Which is why when the Berkeley Heart Lab guy came last week, I told him I would not be testing for Kif6. It had not been replicated in further GWAS.Heck, I don't even use the 9p21.3 test......Why?A VAP cholesterol panel, a HsCRP, a family history and a blood pressure can help me predict risk much better.The problem and backlash facing DTCG and DTMD genetic test purveyors is the 'Ol &quot;Your million dollar major study now rushed to market has just been ...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4045278</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 22:37:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4045278</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does the rs7901695 C variant predispose to diabetes by creating a cryptic exon?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2097928&amp;cid=t_178715_131_f&amp;fid=35038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fongenetics.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F01%2Fdoes-rs7901695-c-variant-predispose-to.html</link>
            <description>The discovery of disease-SNP associations through genome-wide association studies continues at a remarkable pace, but a recent review of common variants implicated in type 2 diabetes (T2D) suggests that, at least for this disease, current methods are unlikely to find many additional susceptibility loci (Prokopenko et al. 2008). We are now at the stage where &quot;additional investigation is needed to define the causal variants, ... to understand disease mechanisms and to effect clinical translation.&quot; I continue to be interested in the (often underappreciated) contribution of pre-mRNA splicing to variation in gene activity, and I was especially intrigued by the statement that the variant with greatest effect size (the rs7901695 C variant in TCF7L2) lies in an intron but its mechanism of action i...</description>
            <author>On Genetics</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2097928</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2097928</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Asking hard questions about personal genome</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1943401&amp;cid=t_178715_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FQo5i_lhxjCc%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;#160; Now that accessing your genetic information is cheaper than buying a Google Smartphone, now what? What can you get from it? How can you use it? Just as important, but less asked - how do you protect it? 
The journal &amp;quot;Nature&amp;quot; joins the debate with a full online issue devoted to the personal genome revolution and its implications. For a fee or for free, you can squeeze more information out of the SNP data or full sequence you got from the commercial genome services you paid for initially. For example, you can get an idea of your risk for a certain disease. With so much information at your fingertips, is everything believable? Should you change your lifestyle because you have one variant for some disease risk? How many &amp;quot;risky&amp;quot; variants does one need anyway? Should y...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1943401</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:44:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1943401</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Breaking news! Baldness genes come from dad too</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1873096&amp;cid=t_178715_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2FtQxVqesiHTY%2F</link>
            <description>The gene for male-pattern baldness (androgen receptor) has traditionally been linked to the X chromosome which means mom passes it on to her sons. Now, two new independent studies published yesterday at the Nature Genetics identified association between hair loss and chromosome 20. 
A genome-wide association study (GWAS) for male-pattern baldness, or androgenetic alopecia, identified a new association at chromosome 20p11.22, between the PAX1 and FOXA2 genes, and confirmed a previous association with the gene encoding the androgen receptor in the X. Tim Spector and colleagues found that 1 in 7 men carry both the chromosome X and chromosome 20 variants, and that these men have a 7-fold risk of having pattern baldness. 
Another independent GWAS found overwhelming evidence for five SNPs on chr...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1873096</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:39:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1873096</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bipolar Genomics</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1383715&amp;cid=t_178715_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2008%2F04%2F18%2Fbipolar-genomics%2F</link>
            <description>Despite much research in recent years, including a study that establishes the heritability of bipolar disorder at 85% (confirming what families and clinicians have known for decades), the precise genetic basis of bipolar disorder remains elusive. Single-gene studies have identified promising candidates here and there, but genome-wide association studies have failed to produce replicable results. 
	Geneticist Dr. Daniel Macarthur recently wrote a super blog post about bipolar gene studies. He explains why several genome-wide association studies involving thousands of patients and controls have not had strong or replicable results. It seems bipolar associations have not been found in variations of the commonly tested genes. Macarthur says that it&amp;#8217;s more likely the variations are more r...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1383715</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:04:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1383715</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

