Gwas For Male-pattern Baldness Identifies 71 Susceptibility Loci Explaining 38% Of The Risk

[Armando Jose]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5691155/

Abstract of the recent study about hairloss and genetics
Male pattern baldness (male pattern baldness) or androgenetic alopecia is one of the most common conditions affecting men, reaching a prevalence of ~50% by the age of 50; however, the known genes explain little of the heritability. Here, we present the results of a genome-wide association study including more than 70,000 men, identifying 71 independently replicated loci, of which 30 are novel. These loci explain 38% of the risk, suggesting that male pattern baldness is less genetically complex than other complex traits. We show that many of these loci contain genes that are relevant to the pathology and highlight pathways and functions underlying baldness. Finally, despite only showing genome-wide genetic correlation with height, pathway-specific genetic correlations are significant for traits including lifespan and cancer. Our study not only greatly increases the number of male pattern baldness loci, illuminating the genetic architecture, but also provides a new approach to disentangling the shared biological pathways underlying complex diseases.

 

[ElTioLaBota]

I havent understood any single word of your post

 

[NewUser]

They are curious as to how male pattern baldness correlates to more genetically complex diseases, like heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes etc. The information gleaned by this research will be submitted to the UK Biobank, a repository of medical knowledge for the benefit of public research. It's all good.

 

[cocona]

There's about a 38% chance I'm gonna kill whoever agreed to these full page ads.

Amen.

 

[Mandar kumthekar]

What did they mean by 38% risk.? If 100 people have all risk variants then 38% of them would surly become bald? That's what they mean by 38% risk?

 

[cocona]

What did they mean by 38% risk.? If 100 people have all risk variants then 38% of them would surly become bald? That's what they mean by 38% risk?

Breaking it down:

Part1:

identifying 71 independently replicated loci, of which 30 are novel.

Loci is the plural of locus. Locus as in the genetics term specifies a position in the genome. See here

By novel it means new. So they defined 30 new loci for genes related to male pattern baldness.


Part2:

These loci explain 38% of the risk

The risk means the probability that one will get male pattern baldness. This means that their identified loci represent .38*risk. Therefore 62% of the chance of getting male pattern baldness cannot be explained via identified loci.

Understand that this study uses a probabilistic approach, so it makes claims about probability and uses genetic correllations between having male pattern baldness and certain genes.

 

[Mandar kumthekar]

Breaking it down:

Part1:


Loci is the plural of locus. Locus as in the genetics term specifies a position in the genome. See here

By novel it means new. So they defined 30 new loci for genes related to male pattern baldness.


Part2:



The risk means the probability that one will get male pattern baldness. This means that their identified loci represent .38*risk. Therefore 62% of the chance of getting male pattern baldness cannot be explained via identified loci.

Understand that this study uses a probabilistic approach, so it makes claims about probability and uses genetic correllations between having male pattern baldness and certain genes.

Really thanks ma'am. I was confused. I always have hard time in understanding studies.
So can we say that male pattern baldness is not entirety genetic ? If genes could only explain near 40% risk then why did studies often say that male pattern baldness is 80% genetic trait.

 

[cocona]

Really thanks ma'am. I was confused. I always have hard time in understanding studies.
So can we say that male pattern baldness is not entirety genetic ? If genes could only explain near 40% risk then why did studies often say that male pattern baldness is 80% genetic trait.

These loci explain 38% of the risk, suggesting that male pattern baldness is less genetically complex than other complex traits.

You have to read on past what op originally bolded. Basically if so few loci explain 38% of the risk then that suggests that male pattern baldness is less complex than other complex genetic traits which would have significantly more loci.

 

[Armando Jose]

Cocona, do you know what genes are responsible for thicker or dense hair?
Based on my idea people with high hair density and thicker hair are less prone to common hair loss

 

[cocona]

Cocona, do you know what genes are responsible for thicker or dense hair?
Based on my idea people with high hair density and thicker hair are less prone to common hair loss

I have no idea. I'm not a geneticist, sorry!

 

[Mandar kumthekar]

Cocona, do you know what genes are responsible for thicker or dense hair?
Based on my idea people with high hair density and thicker hair are less prone to common hair loss

Thicker hair needs more time to miniaturize and turns in to pitch fuzz. Also if you began with high density then you will have noticeable effect of thinning much later than others.

 

[zaman]

Thicker hair needs more time to miniaturize and turns in to pitch fuzz. Also if you began with high density then you will have noticeable effect of thinning much later than others.

Some guys with thick hair have very aggressive/sudden loss and can be later in adulthood. I've seen it before

 

[Mandar kumthekar]

Any think can happen in male pattern baldness. One would need a constant assistantship from a white bearded man to avoid the attack.