Genetic Biomarkers for Endometriosis

In: Biomarkers for Endometriosis · 2017 · pp. 83–93 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59856-7_5 · W2757662007
book-chapter OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 5 in-corpus citations
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07+body, 2026-07-08

Seven genomic regions associated with endometriosis risk explain minimal phenotypic variance and lack individual predictive power, necessitating larger sample sizes or combined data for improved risk prediction.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-13 · read from full text

The paper studied whether known common genetic variants associated with endometriosis risk from GWAS can predict individual endometriosis development. Using effect sizes from seven genome-wide significant loci and simulations incorporating an estimated heritability from all common SNPs (h² = 0.26), it found that combining the seven markers explained only 1.85% of phenotypic variance on the liability scale and provided no meaningful individual predictive power; even with ~30,000 cases, the simulated variance explained by a genetic risk predictor was only ~0.08. A major caveat stated is that current effect sizes are small and predictive accuracy remains limited under present sample sizes. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — evaluating genetic biomarkers and polygenic prediction accuracy for endometriosis risk.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Full text 9,864 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

GWAS studies identified seven genomic regions with robust evidence for genome-wide significant association with endometriosis risk. One important question that arises is whether these genetic markers can be used to predict risk of developing endometriosis for individual women. As with most complex diseases, the effect sizes for genetic markers linked to endometriosis risk are small with odds ratios less than 1.3. If we combine information from all seven markers, we explain only 1.85% of the total phenotypic variance on the liability scale (assuming a population prevalence of endometriosis of 8%) with no predictive power for individual risk. To explore the ability of all common genetic markers to predict endometriosis risk in individuals, we conducted simulations to quantify how useful endometriosis risk prediction is given current parameters. Applying our estimate of heritability (h 2 = 0.26) from all common SNPs and assuming data were available from ~30,000 endometriosis cases, the proportion of variance explained by the risk predictor is still only ~0.08. To improve this prediction would require a far greater sample size. Current data may be useful for population-based stratification into risk categories. This can have applications in some cases such as improved efficiency of screening in breast cancer. In the future, risk prediction for endometriosis might be improved through combining genetic risk scores with clinical data, estimates of environmental effects such as DNA methylation signals, and/or better understanding of disease subtypes. Access this chapter Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout Purchases are for personal use only Similar content being viewed by others

References

Kennedy S, Mardon H, Barlow D. Familial endometriosis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1995;12(1):32–4. Simpson JL, Bischoff FZ. Heritability and molecular genetic studies of endometriosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002;955:239–51. Stefansson H, Geirsson RT, Steinthorsdottir V, Jonsson H, Manolescu A, Kong A, et al. Genetic factors contribute to the risk of developing endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(3):555–9. Hadfield RM, Mardon HJ, Barlow DH, Kennedy SH. Endometriosis in monozygotic twins. Fertil Steril. 1997;68(5):941–2. Moen MH. Endometriosis in monozygotic twins. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73(1):59–62. Treloar SA, O’Connor DT, O’Connor VM, Martin NG. Genetic influences on endometriosis in an Australian twin sample. Fertil Steril. 1999;71(4):701–10. Montgomery GW, Nyholt DR, Zhao ZZ, Treloar SA, Painter JN, Missmer SA, et al. The search for genes contributing to endometriosis risk. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14:447–57. Rahmioglu N, Nyholt DR, Morris AP, Missmer SA, Montgomery GW, Zondervan KT. Genetic variants underlying risk of endometriosis: insights from meta-analysis of eight genome-wide association and replication datasets. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(5):702–16. Zondervan KT, Cardon LR, Kennedy SH. What makes a good case-control study? Design issues for complex traits such as endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(6):1415–23. Treloar SA, Wicks J, Nyholt DR, Montgomery GW, Bahlo M, Smith V, et al. Genomewide linkage study in 1,176 affected sister pair families identifies a significant susceptibility locus for endometriosis on chromosome 10q26. Am J Hum Genet. 2005;77(3):365–76. Zondervan KT, Treloar SA, Lin J, Weeks DE, Nyholt DR, Mangion J, et al. Significant evidence of one or more susceptibility loci for endometriosis with near-Mendelian autosomal inheritance on chromosome 7p13-15. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:717–28. Adachi S, Tajima A, Quan J, Haino K, Yoshihara K, Masuzaki H, et al. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association scans for genetic susceptibility to endometriosis in Japanese population. J Hum Genet. 2010;55(12):816–21. Albertsen HM, Chettier R, Farrington P, Ward K. Genome-wide association study link novel loci to endometriosis. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58257. Painter JN, Anderson CA, Nyholt DR, Macgregor S, Lin J, Lee SH, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies a locus at 7p15.2 associated with endometriosis. Nat Genet. 2011;43(1):51–4. Uno S, Zembutsu H, Hirasawa A, Takahashi A, Kubo M, Akahane T, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies genetic variants in the CDKN2BAS locus associated with endometriosis in Japanese. Nat Genet. 2010;42(8):707–10. Nyholt DR, Low SK, Anderson CA, Painter JN, Uno S, Morris AP, et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis identifies new endometriosis risk loci. Nat Genet. 2012;44(12):1355–9. Pagliardini L, Gentilini D, Sanchez AM, Candiani M, Vigano P, Di Blasio AM. Replication and meta-analysis of previous genome-wide association studies confirm vezatin as the locus with the strongest evidence for association with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(4):987–93. Pagliardini L, Gentilini D, Vigano P, Panina-Bordignon P, Busacca M, Candiani M, et al. An Italian association study and meta-analysis with previous GWAS confirm WNT4, CDKN2BAS and FN1 as the first identified susceptibility loci for endometriosis. J Med Genet. 2013;50(1):43–6. Sundqvist J, Xu H, Vodolazkaia A, Fassbender A, Kyama C, Bokor A, et al. Replication of endometriosis-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms from genome-wide association studies in a Caucasian population. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(3):835–9. Sapkota Y, Low S-K, Adachi S, Attia J, Gordon SD, Henders AK, et al. Confirmed association between endometriosis and the interleukin 1A (IL1A) locus. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(1):239–48. Lee SH, Harold D, Nyholt DR, ANZGene Consortium, International Endogene Consortium, et al. Estimation and partitioning of polygenic variation captured by common SNPs for Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis and endometriosis. Hum Mol Genet. 2013;22(4):832–41. Stranger BE, Stahl EA, Raj T. Progress and promise of genome-wide association studies for human complex trait genetics. Genetics. 2011;187(2):367–83. Schizophrenia Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics C. Biological insights from 108 schizophrenia-associated genetic loci. Nature. 2014;511(7510):421–7. Sapkota Y, Attia J, Gordon SD, Henders AK, Holliday EG, Rahmioglu N, et al. Genetic burden associated with varying degrees of disease severity in endometriosis. Mol Hum Reprod. 2015;21(7):594–602. So HC, Gui AH, Cherny SS, Sham PC. Evaluating the heritability explained by known susceptibility variants: a survey of ten complex diseases. Genet Epidemiol. 2011;35(5):310–7. Dudbridge F. Power and predictive accuracy of polygenic risk scores. PLoS Genet. 2013;9(3):e1003348. Lee SH, Wray NR. Novel genetic analysis for case-control genome-wide association studies: quantification of power and genomic prediction accuracy. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71494. Visscher PM, Hemani G, Vinkhuyzen AAE, Chen G-B, Lee SH, Wray NR, et al. Statistical power to detect genetic (co)variance of complex traits using SNP data in unrelated samples. PLoS Genet. 2014;10(4):e1004269. Maier R, Moser G, Chen GB, Ripke S, Cross-Disorder Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics C, Coryell W, et al. Joint analysis of psychiatric disorders increases accuracy of risk prediction for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder. Am J Hum Genet. 2015;96(2):283–94. Lee SH, Weerasinghe WM, Wray NR, Goddard ME, van der Werf JH. Using information of relatives in genomic prediction to apply effective stratified medicine. Sci Rep. 2017;7:42091. Fachal L, Dunning AM. From candidate gene studies to GWAS and post-GWAS analyses in breast cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2015;30C:32–41. Fung JN, Rogers PA, Montgomery GW. Identifying the biological basis of GWAS hits for endometriosis. Biol Reprod. 2015;92(4):87. McRae AF, Powell JE, Henders AK, Bowdler L, Hemani G, Shah S, et al. Contribution of genetic variation to transgenerational inheritance of DNA methylation. Genome Biol. 2014;15(5):R73. Shah S, McRae AF, Marioni RE, Harris SE, Gibson J, Henders AK, et al. Genetic and environmental exposures constrain epigenetic drift over the human life course. Genome Res. 2014;24(11):1725–33. Shah S, Bonder MJ, Marioni RE, Zhu Z, McRae AF, Zhernakova A, Harris SE, Liewald D, Henders AK, Mendelson MM, Liu C, Joehanes R, Liang L, Levy D, Martin NG, Starr JM, Wijmenga C, Wray NR, Yang J, Montgomery GW, Franke L, Deary IJ, Visscher PM, Heijmans BT, ’t Hoen PA, van Meurs J, Isaacs A, Jansen R, Franke L, Boomsma DI, Pool R, van Dongen J, Hottenga JJ, van Greevenbroek MM, Stehouwer CD, van der Kallen CJ, Schalkwijk CG, Wijmenga C, Zhernakova S, Tigchelaar EF, Slagboom PE, Beekman M, Deelen J, van Heemst D, Veldink JH, van den Berg LH, van Duijn CM, Hofman BA, Uitterlinden AG, Jhamai PM, Verbiest M, Suchiman HE, Verkerk M, van der Breggen R, van Rooij J, Lakenberg N, Mei H, van Iterson M, van Galen M, Bot J, van ’t Hof P, Deelen P, Nooren I, Moed M, Vermaat M, Zhernakova DV, Luijk R, Bonder MJ, van Dijk F, Arindrarto W, Kielbasa SM, Swertz MA, van Zwet EW. Improving phenotypic prediction by combining genetic and epigenetic associations. Am J Hum Genet. 2015;97(1):75–85. Acknowledgments GWM is an NHMRC Principal Research Fellow (1078399), SHL is an ARC Future Fellow (FT160100229), and the work was supported by NHMRC project grants (1026033, 1049472, 1080157). Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Editor information Editors and Affiliations Rights and permissions Copyright information © 2017 Springer International Publishing AG About this chapter Cite this chapter Lee, S.H., Sapkota, Y., Fung, J., Montgomery, G.W. (2017). Genetic Biomarkers for Endometriosis. In: D'Hooghe, T. (eds) Biomarkers for Endometriosis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59856-7_5 Download citation DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59856-7_5 Published: Publisher Name: Springer, Cham Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59854-3 Online ISBN: 978-3-319-59856-7 eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (35)

Cited by (5)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK