Conference Scene: The great debate: genome-wide association studies in pharmacogenetics research, good or bad?
Will genome-wide association studies (GWAS) 'work' for pharmacogenetics research? This question was the topic of a staged debate, with pro and con sides, aimed to bring out the strengths and weaknesses of GWAS for pharmacogenetics studies. After a full day of seminars at the Fifth Statistical Analysis Workshop of the Pharmacogenetics Research Network, the lively debate was held--appropriately--at Goonies Comedy Club in Rochester (MN, USA). The pro side emphasized that the many GWAS successes for identifying genetic variants associated with disease risk show that it works; that the current genotyping platforms are efficient, with good imputation methods to fill in missing data; that its global assessment is always a success even if no significant associations are detected; and that genetic effects are likely to be large because humans have not evolved in a drug-therapy environment. By contrast, the con side emphasized that we have limited knowledge of the complexity of the genome; limited clinical phenotypes compromise studies; the likely multifactorial nature of drug response clouding the small genetic effects; and limitations of sample size and replication studies in pharmacogenetic studies. Lively and insightful discussions emphasized further research efforts that might benefit GWAS in pharmacogenetics.
Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Harwick 7, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. baileyk@mayo.edu
Kent R
KR
Bailey
Cheng
C
Cheng
D055106:Genome-Wide Association Study / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D010597:Pharmacogenetics / Q000379:methods*; D020641:Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; D012106:Research