» Articles » PMID: 30134085

Genome-wide Association Study of Cognitive Flexibility Assessed by the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

Overview
Date 2018 Aug 23
PMID 30134085
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cognitive flexibility is a critical component of executive function and is strongly influenced by genetic factors. We conducted a genome-wide association study of cognitive flexibility (as measured by perseverative errors on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test) in two sets of African American (AA) and European American (EA) subjects (Yale-Penn-1: 1,411 AAs/949 EAs; Yale-Penn-2: 1,178 AAs/1,335 EAs). We examined the association of cognitive flexibility with genotyped or imputed SNPs across the genome. In AAs, two correlated common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (rs7165213/rs35633795) in the downstream region of the noncoding gene LOC101927286 on chromosome 15 showed genome-wide significant (GWS) associations with cognitive flexibility (Yale-Penn-1: p = 6.0 × 10 /1.3 × 10 ; Yale-Penn-2: p = .029/.010; meta-analysis: p = 4.2 × 10 /1.0 × 10 ) in the same effect direction. In EAs, no GWS associations were observed. Enriched gene sets identified by Data-driven Expression-Prioritized Integration for Complex Traits (DEPICT) analysis of the top SNPs (p  < 10 ) included the signalosome and ubiquitin-specific peptidase 9, X-linked (USP9X) subnetwork in AAs, and abnormal frontal and occipital bone morphology in EAs. We also performed polygenic risk score (PRS) analysis to examine the genetic correlation of cognition-proxy phenotypes (general cognitive function, education attainment, childhood intelligence, and infant head circumference) and cognitive flexibility in EAs. The PRS derived from general cognitive function-associated SNPs was significantly associated with cognitive flexibility. Nongenetic factors (age, education, sex, and tobacco recency) also exerted significant effects on cognitive flexibility. Our study demonstrates that both genetic and nongenetic factors impact cognitive flexibility, and variants in genes involved in protein degradation and brain development may contribute to population variation in cognitive function.

Citing Articles

GenomicSEM Modelling of Diverse Executive Function GWAS Improves Gene Discovery.

Perry L, Chevalier N, Luciano M Behav Genet. 2025; 55(2):71-85.

PMID: 39891803 PMC: 11882726. DOI: 10.1007/s10519-025-10214-4.


Mapping the cortico-striatal transcriptome in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Sudre G, Gildea D, Shastri G, Sharp W, Jung B, Xu Q Mol Psychiatry. 2022; 28(2):792-800.

PMID: 36380233 PMC: 9918667. DOI: 10.1038/s41380-022-01844-9.


General intelligence and executive functioning are overlapping but separable at genetic and molecular pathway levels: An analytical review of existing GWAS findings.

Ciobanu L, Stankov L, Schubert K, Amare A, Jawahar M, Lawrence-Wood E PLoS One. 2022; 17(10):e0272368.

PMID: 36251633 PMC: 9576059. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272368.

References
1.
Huttenhofer A, Schattner P, Polacek N . Non-coding RNAs: hope or hype?. Trends Genet. 2005; 21(5):289-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2005.03.007. View

2.
Davies G, Armstrong N, Bis J, Bressler J, Chouraki V, Giddaluru S . Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N=53949). Mol Psychiatry. 2015; 20(2):183-92. PMC: 4356746. DOI: 10.1038/mp.2014.188. View

3.
Minassian A, Granholm E, Verney S, Perry W . Visual scanning deficits in schizophrenia and their relationship to executive functioning impairment. Schizophr Res. 2005; 74(1):69-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2004.07.008. View

4.
Price A, Patterson N, Plenge R, Weinblatt M, Shadick N, Reich D . Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet. 2006; 38(8):904-9. DOI: 10.1038/ng1847. View

5.
Lee T, Mosing M, Henry J, Trollor J, Ames D, Martin N . Genetic influences on four measures of executive functions and their covariation with general cognitive ability: the Older Australian Twins Study. Behav Genet. 2012; 42(4):528-38. DOI: 10.1007/s10519-012-9526-1. View