
pmid: 38839884
pmc: PMC11176086
AbstractRestless legs syndrome (RLS) affects up to 10% of older adults. Their healthcare is impeded by delayed diagnosis and insufficient treatment. To advance disease prediction and find new entry points for therapy, we performed meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies in 116,647 individuals with RLS (cases) and 1,546,466 controls of European ancestry. The pooled analysis increased the number of risk loci eightfold to 164, including three on chromosome X. Sex-specific meta-analyses revealed largely overlapping genetic predispositions of the sexes (rg = 0.96). Locus annotation prioritized druggable genes such as glutamate receptors 1 and 4, and Mendelian randomization indicated RLS as a causal risk factor for diabetes. Machine learning approaches combining genetic and nongenetic information performed best in risk prediction (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.82–0.91). In summary, we identified targets for drug development and repurposing, prioritized potential causal relationships between RLS and relevant comorbidities and risk factors for follow-up and provided evidence that nonlinear interactions are likely relevant to RLS risk prediction.
Male, D.E.S.I.R. study group, Mendelian Randomization Analysis, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, 23andMe Research Team, Article, Restless Legs Syndrome/genetics, Machine Learning, Risk Factors, Restless Legs Syndrome, Humans, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Female, Genome-Wide Association Study
Male, D.E.S.I.R. study group, Mendelian Randomization Analysis, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, 23andMe Research Team, Article, Restless Legs Syndrome/genetics, Machine Learning, Risk Factors, Restless Legs Syndrome, Humans, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Female, Genome-Wide Association Study
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 37 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
