@article{MatsudaUnoKondoetal.2015,
  author    = {Matsuda, Yoichi and Uno, Yoshinobu and Kondo, Mariko and Gilchrist, Michael J. and Zorn, Aaron M. and Rokhsar, Daniel S. and Schmid, Michael and Taira, Masanori},
  title     = {A New Nomenclature of Xenopus laevis Chromosomes Based on the Phylogenetic Relationship to Silurana/Xenopus tropicalis},
  series = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  volume    = {145},
  journal   = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  number    = {3-4},
  issn      = {1424-8581},
  doi       = {10.1159/000381292},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196748},
  pages     = {187-191},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Xenopus laevis (XLA) is an allotetraploid species which appears to have undergone whole-genome duplication after the interspecific hybridization of 2 diploid species closely related to Silurana/Xenopus tropicalis (XTR). Previous cDNA fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) experiments have identified 9 sets of homoeologous chromosomes in X. laevis, in which 8 sets correspond to chromosomes 1-8 of X. tropicalis (XTR1-XTR8), and the last set corresponds to a fusion of XTR9 and XTR10. In addition, recent X. laevis genome sequencing and BAC-FISH experiments support this physiological relationship and show no gross chromosome translocation in the X. laevis karyotype. Therefore, for the benefit of both comparative cytogenetics and genome research, we here propose a new chromosome nomenclature for X. laevis based on the phylogenetic relationship and chromosome length, i.e. XLA1L, XLA1S, XLA2L, XLA2S, and so on, in which the numbering of XLA chromosomes corresponds to that in X. tropicalis and the postfixes 'L' and 'S' stand for 'long' and 'short' chromosomes in the homoeologous pairs, which can be distinguished cytologically by their relative size. The last chromosome set is named XLA9L and XLA9S, in which XLA9 corresponds to both XTR9 and XTR10, and hence, to emphasize the phylogenetic relationship to X. tropicalis, XLA9_10L and XLA9_10S are also used as synonyms.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchmidEvansBogart2015,
  author    = {Schmid, Michael and Evans, Ben J. and Bogart, James P.},
  title     = {Polyploidy in Amphibia},
  series = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  volume    = {145},
  journal   = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  number    = {3-4},
  issn      = {1424-8581},
  doi       = {10.1159/000431388},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196730},
  pages     = {315-330},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {This review summarizes the current status of the known extant genuine polyploid anuran and urodelan species, as well as spontaneously originated and/or experimentally produced amphibian polyploids. The mechanisms by which polyploids can originate, the meiotic pairing configurations, the diploidization processes operating in polyploid genomes, the phenomenon of hybridogenesis, and the relationship between polyploidization and sex chromosome evolution are discussed. The polyploid systems in some important amphibian taxa are described in more detail.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchmidSteinlein2015,
  author    = {Schmid, Michael and Steinlein, Claus},
  title     = {Chromosome Banding in Amphibia. XXXII. The Genus Xenopus (Anura, Pipidae)},
  series = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  volume    = {145},
  journal   = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  number    = {3-4},
  issn      = {1424-8581},
  doi       = {10.1159/000433481},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196727},
  pages     = {201-217},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Mitotic chromosomes of 16 species of the frog genus Xenopus were prepared from kidney and lung cell cultures. In the chromosomes of 7 species, high-resolution replication banding patterns could be induced by treating the cultures with 5-bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) and deoxythymidine (dT) in succession, and in 6 of these species the BrdU/dT-banded chromosomes could be arranged into karyotypes. In the 3 species of the clade with 2n = 20 and 4n = 40 chromosomes (X. tropicalis, X. epitropicalis, X. new tetraploid 1), as well as in the 3 species with 4n = 36 chromosomes (X. laevis, X. borealis, X. muelleri), the BrdU/dT-banded karyotypes show a high degree of homoeology, though differences were detected between these groups. Translocations, inversions, insertions or sex-specific replication bands were not observed. Minor replication asynchronies found between chromosomes probably involve heterochromatic regions. BrdU/dT replication banding of Xenopus chromosomes provides the landmarks necessary for the exact physical mapping of genes and repetitive sequences. FISH with an X. laevis 5S rDNA probe detected multiple hybridization sites at or near the long-arm telomeric regions in most chromosomes of X. laevis and X. borealis, whereas in X. muelleri, the 5S rDNA sequences are located exclusively at the long-arm telomeres of a single chromosome pair. Staining with the AT base pair-specific fluorochrome quinacrine mustard revealed brightly fluorescing heterochromatic regions in the majority of X. borealis chromosomes which are absent in other Xenopus species.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PootHaaf2015,
  author    = {Poot, Martin and Haaf, Thomas},
  title     = {Mechanisms of Origin, Phenotypic Effects and Diagnostic Implications of Complex Chromosome Rearrangements},
  series = {Molecular Syndromology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Molecular Syndromology},
  number    = {3},
  issn      = {1661-8769},
  doi       = {10.1159/000438812},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196524},
  pages     = {110-134},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Complex chromosome rearrangements (CCRs) are currently defined as structural genome variations that involve more than 2 chromosome breaks and result in exchanges of chromosomal segments. They are thought to be extremely rare, but their detection rate is rising because of improvements in molecular cytogenetic technology. Their population frequency is also underestimated, since many CCRs may not elicit a phenotypic effect. CCRs may be the result of fork stalling and template switching, microhomology-mediated break-induced repair, breakage-fusion-bridge cycles, or chromothripsis. Patients with chromosomal instability syndromes show elevated rates of CCRs due to impaired DNA double-strand break responses during meiosis. Therefore, the putative functions of the proteins encoded by ATM, BLM, WRN, ATR, MRE11, NBS1, and RAD51 in preventing CCRs are discussed. CCRs may exert a pathogenic effect by either (1) gene dosage-dependent mechanisms, e.g. haploinsufficiency, (2) mechanisms based on disruption of the genomic architecture, such that genes, parts of genes or regulatory elements are truncated, fused or relocated and thus their interactions disturbed - these mechanisms will predominantly affect gene expression - or (3) mixed mutation mechanisms in which a CCR on one chromosome is combined with a different type of mutation on the other chromosome. Such inferred mechanisms of pathogenicity need corroboration by mRNA sequencing. Also, future studies with in vitro models, such as inducible pluripotent stem cells from patients with CCRs, and transgenic model organisms should substantiate current inferences regarding putative pathogenic effects of CCRs. The ramifications of the growing body of information on CCRs for clinical and experimental genetics and future treatment modalities are briefly illustrated with 2 cases, one of which suggests KDM4C(JMJD2C) as a novel candidate gene for mental retardation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchneiderElHajjMuelleretal.2015,
  author    = {Schneider, Eberhard and El Hajj, Nady and M{\"u}ller, Fabian and Navarro, Bianca and Haaf, Thomas},
  title     = {Epigenetic Dysregulation in the Prefrontal Cortex of Suicide Completers},
  series = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  volume    = {146},
  journal   = {Cytogenetic and Genome Research},
  number    = {1},
  issn      = {1424-8581},
  doi       = {10.1159/000435778},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-199032},
  pages     = {19-27},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {The epigenome is thought to mediate between genes and the environment, particularly in response to adverse life experiences. Similar to other psychiatric diseases, the suicide liability of an individual appears to be influenced by many genetic factors of small effect size as well as by environmental stressors. To identify epigenetic marks associated with suicide, which is considered the endpoint of complex gene-environment interactions, we compared the cortex DNA methylation patterns of 6 suicide completers versus 6 non-psychiatric sudden-death controls, using Illumina 450K methylation arrays. Consistent with a multifactorial disease model, we found DNA methylation changes in a large number of genes, but no changes with large effects reaching genome-wide significance. Global methylation of all analyzed CpG sites was significantly (0.25 percentage point) lower in suicide than in control brains, whereas the vast majority (97\%) of the top 1,000 differentially methylated regions (DMRs) were higher methylated (0.6 percentage point) in suicide brains. Annotation analysis of the top 1,000 DMRs revealed an enrichment of differentially methylated promoters in functional categories associated with transcription and expression in the brain. In addition, we performed a comprehensive literature research to identify suicide genes that have been replicated in independent genetic association, brain methylation and/or expression studies. Although, in general, there was no significant overlap between different published data sets or between our top 1,000 DMRs and published data sets, our methylation screen strengthens a number of candidate genes (APLP2, BDNF, HTR1A, NUAK1, PHACTR3, MSMP, SLC6A4, SYN2, and SYNE2) and supports a role for epigenetics in the pathophysiology of suicide.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KarastanevaLanzWaweretal.2015,
  author    = {Karastaneva, Anna and Lanz, Sofia and Wawer, Angela and Behrends, Uta and Schindler, Detlev and Dietrich, Ralf and Burdach, Stefan and Urban, Christian and Benesch, Martin and Seidel, Markus G.},
  title     = {Immune thrombocytopenia in two unrelated Fanconi anemia patients - a mere coincidence?},
  series = {Frontiers in Pediatrics},
  volume    = {3},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Pediatrics},
  number    = {50},
  doi       = {10.3389/fped.2015.00050},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-149837},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Thrombocytopenia and pancytopenia, occurring in patients with Fanconi anemia (FA), are interpreted either as progression to bone marrow failure or as developing myelodysplasia. On the other hand, immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) represents an acquired and often self-limiting benign hematologic disorder, associated with peripheral, immune-mediated, platelet destruction requiring different management modalities than those used in congenital bone marrow failure syndromes, including FA. Here, we describe the clinical course of two independent FA patients with atypical - namely immune - thrombocytopenia. While in one patient belonging to complementation group FA-A, the ITP started at 17 months of age and showed a chronically persisting course with severe purpura, responding well to intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) and later also danazol, a synthetic androgen, the other patient (of complementation group FA-D2) had a self-limiting course that resolved after one administration of IVIG. No cytogenetic aberrations or bone marrow abnormalities other than FA-typical mild dysplasia were detected. Our data show that acute and chronic ITP may occur in FA patients and impose individual diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in this rare congenital bone marrow failure/tumor predisposition syndrome. The management and a potential context of immune pathogenesis with the underlying marrow disorder are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RemmeleLutherBalkenholetal.2015,
  author    = {Remmele, Christian W. and Luther, Christian H. and Balkenhol, Johannes and Dandekar, Thomas and M{\"u}ller, Tobias and Dittrich, Marcus T.},
  title     = {Integrated inference and evaluation of host-fungi interaction networks},
  series = {Frontiers in Microbiology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Microbiology},
  number    = {764},
  doi       = {10.3389/fmicb.2015.00764},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-148278},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Fungal microorganisms frequently lead to life-threatening infections. Within this group of pathogens, the commensal Candida albicans and the filamentous fungus Aspergillus fumigatus are by far the most important causes of invasive mycoses in Europe. A key capability for host invasion and immune response evasion are specific molecular interactions between the fungal pathogen and its human host. Experimentally validated knowledge about these crucial interactions is rare in literature and even specialized host pathogen databases mainly focus on bacterial and viral interactions whereas information on fungi is still sparse. To establish large-scale host fungi interaction networks on a systems biology scale, we develop an extended inference approach based on protein orthology and data on gene functions. Using human and yeast intraspecies networks as template, we derive a large network of pathogen host interactions (PHI). Rigorous filtering and refinement steps based on cellular localization and pathogenicity information of predicted interactors yield a primary scaffold of fungi human and fungi mouse interaction networks. Specific enrichment of known pathogenicity-relevant genes indicates the biological relevance of the predicted PHI. A detailed inspection of functionally relevant subnetworks reveals novel host fungal interaction candidates such as the Candida virulence factor PLB1 and the anti-fungal host protein APP. Our results demonstrate the applicability of interolog-based prediction methods for host fungi interactions and underline the importance of filtering and refinement steps to attain biologically more relevant interactions. This integrated network framework can serve as a basis for future analyses of high-throughput host fungi transcriptome and proteome data.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BlancoKuchenbaeckerCuadrasetal.2015,
  author    = {Blanco, Ignacio and Kuchenbaecker, Karoline and Cuadras, Daniel and Wang, Xianshu and Barrowdale, Daniel and Ruiz de Garibay, Gorka and Librado, Pablo and Sanchez-Gracia, Alejandro and Rozas, Julio and Bonifaci, N{\´u}ria and McGuffog, Lesley and Pankratz, Vernon S. and Islam, Abul and Mateo, Francesca and Berenguer, Antoni and Petit, Anna and Catal{\`a}, Isabel and Brunet, Joan and Feliubadal{\´o}, Lidia and Tornero, Eva and Ben{\´i}tez, Javier and Osorio, Ana and Ram{\´o}n y Cajal, Teresa and Nevanlinna, Heli and Aittom{\"a}ki, Kristina and Arun, Banu K. and Toland, Amanda E. and Karlan, Beth Y. and Walsh, Christine and Lester, Jenny and Greene, Mark H. and Mai, Phuong L. and Nussbaum, Robert L. and Andrulis, Irene L. and Domchek, Susan M. and Nathanson, Katherine L. and Rebbeck, Timothy R. and Barkardottir, Rosa B. and Jakubowska, Anna and Lubinski, Jan and Durda, Katarzyna and Jaworska-Bieniek, Katarzyna and Claes, Kathleen and Van Maerken, Tom and D{\´i}ez, Orland and Hansen, Thomas V. and J{\o}nson, Lars and Gerdes, Anne-Marie and Ejlertsen, Bent and De la Hoya, Miguel and Cald{\´e}s, Trinidad and Dunning, Alison M. and Oliver, Clare and Fineberg, Elena and Cook, Margaret and Peock, Susan and McCann, Emma and Murray, Alex and Jacobs, Chris and Pichert, Gabriella and Lalloo, Fiona and Chu, Carol and Dorkins, Huw and Paterson, Joan and Ong, Kai-Ren and Teixeira, Manuel R. and Hogervorst, Frans B. L. and Van der Hout, Annemarie H. and Seynaeve, Caroline and Van der Luijt, Rob B. and Ligtenberg, Marjolijn J. L. and Devilee, Peter and Wijnen, Juul T. and Rookus, Matti A. and Meijers-Heijboer, Hanne E. J. and Blok, Marinus J. and Van den Ouweland, Ans M. W. and Aalfs, Cora M. and Rodriguez, Gustavo C. and Phillips, Kelly-Anne A. and Piedmonte, Marion and Nerenstone, Stacy R. and Bae-Jump, Victoria L. and O'Malley, David M. and Schmutzler, Rita K. and Wappenschmidt, Barbara and Rhiem, Kerstin and Engel, Christoph and Meindl, Alfons and Ditsch, Nina and Arnold, Norbert and Plendl, Hansjoerg J. and Niederacher, Dieter and Sutter, Christian and Wang-Gohrke, Shan and Steinemann, Doris and Preisler-Adams, Sabine and Kast, Karin and Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda and Gehrig, Andrea and Bojesen, Anders and Pedersen, Inge Sokilde and Sunde, Lone and Birk Jensen, Uffe and Thomassen, Mads and Kruse, Torben A. and Foretova, Lenka and Peterlongo, Paolo and Bernard, Loris and Peissel, Bernard and Scuvera, Giulietta and Manoukian, Siranoush and Radice, Paolo and Ottini, Laura and Montagna, Marco and Agata, Simona and Maugard, Christine and Simard, Jacques and Soucy, Penny and Berger, Andreas and Fink-Retter, Anneliese and Singer, Christian F. and Rappaport, Christine and Geschwantler-Kaulich, Daphne and Tea, Muy-Kheng and Pfeiler, Georg and John, Esther M. and Miron, Alex and Neuhausen, Susan L. and Terry, Mary Beth and Chung, Wendy K. and Daly, Mary B. and Goldgar, David E. and Janavicius, Ramunas and Dorfling, Cecilia M. and Van Rensburg, Elisabeth J. and Fostira, Florentia and Konstantopoulou, Irene and Garber, Judy and Godwin, Andrew K. and Olah, Edith and Narod, Steven A. and Rennert, Gad and Paluch, Shani Shimon and Laitman, Yael and Friedman, Eitan and Liljegren, Annelie and Rantala, Johanna and Stenmark-Askmalm, Marie and Loman, Niklas and Imyanitov, Evgeny N. and Hamann, Ute and Spurdle, Amanda B. and Healey, Sue and Weitzel, Jeffrey N. and Herzog, Josef and Margileth, David and Gorrini, Chiara and Esteller, Manel and G{\´o}mez, Antonio and Sayols, Sergi and Vidal, Enrique and Heyn, Holger and Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique and L{\´e}on{\´e}, Melanie and Barjhoux, Laure and Fassy-Colcombet, Marion and Pauw, Antoine de and Lasset, Christine and Fert Ferrer, Sandra and Castera, Laurent and Berthet, Pascaline and Cornelis, Fran{\c{c}}ois and Bignon, Yves-Jean and Damiola, Francesca and Mazoyer, Sylvie and Sinilnikova, Olga M. and Maxwell, Christopher A. and Vijai, Joseph and Robson, Mark and Kauff, Noah and Corines, Marina J. and Villano, Danylko and Cunningham, Julie and Lee, Adam and Lindor, Noralane and L{\´a}zaro, Conxi and Easton, Douglas F. and Offit, Kenneth and Chenevix-Trench, Georgia and Couch, Fergus J. and Antoniou, Antonis C. and Pujana, Miguel Angel},
  title     = {Assessing associations between the AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 functional module and breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {4},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0120020},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-143469},
  pages     = {e0120020},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {While interplay between BRCA1 and AURKA-RHAMM-TPX2-TUBG1 regulates mammary epithelial polarization, common genetic variation in HMMR (gene product RHAMM) may be associated with risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Following on these observations, we further assessed the link between the AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 functional module and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Forty-one single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers and subsequently analyzed using a retrospective likelihood approach. The association of HMMR rs299290 with breast cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers was confirmed: per-allele hazard ratio (HR) = 1.10, 95\% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 - 1.15, p = 1.9 x 10\(^{-4}\) (false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted p = 0.043). Variation in CSTF1, located next to AURKA, was also found to be associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers: rs2426618 per-allele HR = 1.10, 95\% CI 1.03 - 1.16, p = 0.005 (FDR-adjusted p = 0.045). Assessment of pairwise interactions provided suggestions (FDR-adjusted p\(_{interaction}\) values > 0.05) for deviations from the multiplicative model for rs299290 and CSTF1 rs6064391, and rs299290 and TUBG1 rs11649877 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following these suggestions, the expression of HMMR and AURKA or TUBG1 in sporadic breast tumors was found to potentially interact, influencing patients' survival. Together, the results of this study support the hypothesis of a causative link between altered function of AURKA-HMMR-TPX2-TUBG1 and breast carcinogenesis in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BleinBardelDanjeanetal.2015,
  author    = {Blein, Sophie and Bardel, Claire and Danjean, Vincent and McGuffog, Lesley and Healay, Sue and Barrowdale, Daniel and Lee, Andrew and Dennis, Joe and Kuchenbaecker, Karoline B. and Soucy, Penny and Terry, Mary Beth and Chung, Wendy K. and Goldgar, David E. and Buys, Saundra S. and Janavicius, Ramunas and Tihomirova, Laima and Tung, Nadine and Dorfling, Cecilia M. and van Rensburg, Elizabeth J. and Neuhausen, Susan L. and Ding, Yuan Chun and Gerdes, Anne-Marie and Ejlertsen, Bent and Nielsen, Finn C. and Hansen, Thomas V. O. and Osorio, Ana and Benitez, Javier and Andreas Conejero, Raquel and Segota, Ena and Weitzel, Jeffrey N. and Thelander, Margo and Peterlongo, Paolo and Radice, Paolo and Pensotti, Valeria and Dolcetti, Riccardo and Bonanni, Bernardo and Peissel, Bernard and Zaffaroni, Daniela and Scuvera, Giulietta and Manoukian, Siranoush and Varesco, Liliana and Capone, Gabriele L. and Papi, Laura and Ottini, Laura and Yannoukakos, Drakoulis and Konstantopoulou, Irene and Garber, Judy and Hamann, Ute and Donaldson, Alan and Brady, Angela and Brewer, Carole and Foo, Claire and Evans, D. Gareth and Frost, Debra and Eccles, Diana and Douglas, Fiona and Cook, Jackie and Adlard, Julian and Barwell, Julian and Walker, Lisa and Izatt, Louise and Side, Lucy E. and Kennedy, M. John and Tischkowitz, Marc and Rogers, Mark T. and Porteous, Mary E. and Morrison, Patrick J. and Platte, Radka and Eeles, Ros and Davidson, Rosemarie and Hodgson, Shirley and Cole, Trevor and Godwin, Andrew K and Isaacs, Claudine and Claes, Kathleen and De Leeneer, Kim and Meindl, Alfons and Gehrig, Andrea and Wappenschmidt, Barbara and Sutter, Christian and Engel, Christoph and Niederacher, Dieter and Steinemann, Doris and Plendl, Hansjoerg and Kast, Karin and Rhiem, Kerstin and Ditsch, Nina and Arnold, Norbert and Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda and Schmutzler, Rita K. and Preisler-Adams, Sabine and Markov, Nadja Bogdanova and Wang-Gohrke, Shan and de Pauw, Antoine and Lefol, Cedrick and Lasset, Christine and Leroux, Dominique and Rouleau, Etienne and Damiola, Francesca and Dreyfus, Helene and Barjhoux, Laure and Golmard, Lisa and Uhrhammer, Nancy and Bonadona, Valerie and Sornin, Valerie and Bignon, Yves-Jean and Carter, Jonathan and Van Le, Linda and Piedmonte, Marion and DiSilvestro, Paul A. and de la Hoya, Miguel and Caldes, Trinidad and Nevanlinna, Heli and Aittom{\"a}ki, Kristiina and Jager, Agnes and van den Ouweland, Ans M. W. and Kets, Carolien M. and Aalfs, Cora M. and van Leeuwen, Flora E. and Hogervorst, Frans B. L. and Meijers-Heijboer, Hanne E. J. and Oosterwijk, Jan C. and van Roozendaal, Kees E. P. and Rookus, Matti A. and Devilee, Peter and van der Luijt, Rob B. and Olah, Edith and Diez, Orland and Teule, Alex and Lazaro, Conxi and Blanco, Ignacio and Del Valle, Jesus and Jakubowska, Anna and Sukiennicki, Grzegorz and Gronwald, Jacek and Spurdle, Amanda B. and Foulkes, William and Olswold, Curtis and Lindor, Noralene M. and Pankratz, Vernon S. and Szabo, Csilla I. and Lincoln, Anne and Jacobs, Lauren and Corines, Marina and Robson, Mark and Vijai, Joseph and Berger, Andreas and Fink-Retter, Anneliese and Singer, Christian F. and Rappaport, Christine and Geschwantler Kaulich, Daphne and Pfeiler, Georg and Tea, Muy-Kheng and Greene, Mark H. and Mai, Phuong L. and Rennert, Gad and Imyanitov, Evgeny N. and Mulligan, Anna Marie and Glendon, Gord and Andrulis, Irene L. and Tchatchou, Andrine and Toland, Amanda Ewart and Pedersen, Inge Sokilde and Thomassen, Mads and Kruse, Torben A. and Jensen, Uffe Birk and Caligo, Maria A. and Friedman, Eitan and Zidan, Jamal and Laitman, Yael and Lindblom, Annika and Melin, Beatrice and Arver, Brita and Loman, Niklas and Rosenquist, Richard and Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. and Nussbaum, Robert L. and Ramus, Susan J. and Nathanson, Katherine L. and Domchek, Susan M. and Rebbeck, Timothy R. and Arun, Banu K. and Mitchell, Gillian and Karlan, Bethy Y. and Lester, Jenny and Orsulic, Sandra and Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique and Thomas, Gilles and Simard, Jacques and Couch, Fergus J. and Offit, Kenenth and Easton, Douglas F. and Chenevix-Trench, Georgia and Antoniou, Antonis C. and Mazoyer, Sylvie and Phelan, Catherine M. and Sinilnikova, Olga M. and Cox, David G.},
  title     = {An original phylogenetic approach identified mitochondrial haplogroup T1a1 as inversely associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers},
  series = {Breast Cancer Research},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Breast Cancer Research},
  number    = {61},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13058-015-0567-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-145458},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Introduction: Individuals carrying pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in DNA double-strand break repair, DNA alterations that can be caused by exposure to reactive oxygen species, a main source of which are mitochondria. Mitochondrial genome variations affect electron transport chain efficiency and reactive oxygen species production. Individuals with different mitochondrial haplogroups differ in their metabolism and sensitivity to oxidative stress. Variability in mitochondrial genetic background can alter reactive oxygen species production, leading to cancer risk. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that mitochondrial haplogroups modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Methods: We genotyped 22,214 (11,421 affected, 10,793 unaffected) mutation carriers belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 for 129 mitochondrial polymorphisms using the iCOGS array. Haplogroup inference and association detection were performed using a phylogenetic approach. ALTree was applied to explore the reference mitochondrial evolutionary tree and detect subclades enriched in affected or unaffected individuals. Results: We discovered that subclade T1a1 was depleted in affected BRCA2 mutation carriers compared with the rest of clade T (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.55; 95\% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.88; P = 0.01). Compared with the most frequent haplogroup in the general population (that is, H and T clades), the T1a1 haplogroup has a HR of 0.62 (95\% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P = 0.03). We also identified three potential susceptibility loci, including G13708A/rs28359178, which has demonstrated an inverse association with familial breast cancer risk. Conclusions: This study illustrates how original approaches such as the phylogeny-based method we used can empower classical molecular epidemiological studies aimed at identifying association or risk modification effects.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AppelScholzMuelleretal.2015,
  author    = {Appel, Mirjam and Scholz, Claus-J{\"u}rgen and M{\"u}ller, Tobias and Dittrich, Marcus and K{\"o}nig, Christian and Bockstaller, Marie and Oguz, Tuba and Khalili, Afshin and Antwi-Adjei, Emmanuel and Schauer, Tamas and Margulies, Carla and Tanimoto, Hiromu and Yarali, Ayse},
  title     = {Genome-Wide Association Analyses Point to Candidate Genes for Electric Shock Avoidance in Drosophila melanogaster},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {5},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0126986},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-152006},
  pages     = {e0126986},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Electric shock is a common stimulus for nociception-research and the most widely used reinforcement in aversive associative learning experiments. Yet, nothing is known about the mechanisms it recruits at the periphery. To help fill this gap, we undertook a genome-wide association analysis using 38 inbred Drosophila melanogaster strains, which avoided shock to varying extents. We identified 514 genes whose expression levels and/or sequences covaried with shock avoidance scores. We independently scrutinized 14 of these genes using mutants, validating the effect of 7 of them on shock avoidance. This emphasizes the value of our candidate gene list as a guide for follow-up research. In addition, by integrating our association results with external protein-protein interaction data we obtained a shock avoidance- associated network of 38 genes. Both this network and the original candidate list contained a substantial number of genes that affect mechanosensory bristles, which are hairlike organs distributed across the fly's body. These results may point to a potential role for mechanosensory bristles in shock sensation. Thus, we not only provide a first list of candidate genes for shock avoidance, but also point to an interesting new hypothesis on nociceptive mechanisms.},
  language  = {en}
}