Differences in Sensitivity to Environment Depending on Catechol-O-Methyltransferase (COMT) Gene? A Meta-analysis of Child and Adolescent Gene-by-Environment Studies.
Saved in:
| Title: | Differences in Sensitivity to Environment Depending on Catechol-O-Methyltransferase (COMT) Gene? A Meta-analysis of Child and Adolescent Gene-by-Environment Studies. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cao, Cong1 (AUTHOR) caocong@sdu.edu.cn, Cao, Lili2 (AUTHOR), Chen, Jie3 (AUTHOR) chenjie@psych.ac.cn |
| Source: | Journal of Youth & Adolescence. Apr2019, Vol. 48 Issue 4, p655-667. 13p. 1 Diagram, 2 Charts, 1 Graph. |
| Subject Terms: | *Cognition, *Emotions, Catechol-O-methyltransferase gene, Human genetics, Serotonin transporters, Meta-analysis, Confidence intervals, Methyltransferases, Systematic reviews, Effect sizes (Statistics), Genetic polymorphisms, Environmentally induced diseases, Social skills, Ethnic groups |
| Abstract: | To date, several gene-by-environment (G×E) meta-analyses have been conducted to provide cumulative G×E evidence from previous inconsistent empirical studies; however, these meta-analyses have mainly focused on the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR). The present study aimed to conduct the first meta-analysis that tested whether and how an important dopaminergic gene—the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene contributed to differences in child and adolescent environmental sensitivity. A total of 22 studies with 20,528 participants involving in various developmental outcomes (e.g., externalizing problems, emotional problems, cognitive development and social behaviors) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled effect size of environment-outcome associations in the Met-allele carriers (r = 0.11, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.15], p <.001) did not significantly differ from that in the Val/Val homozygotes (r = 0.14, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.20], p < 0.001) (Qcontrast (1) = 0.37, p = 0.54). The aggregated Liptak-Stouffer Z-score that combined the p-values of the COMT-environment interaction yield a nonsignificant result (p = 0.52). Moreover, outcome domain, sample age, ethnicity and assessment methods for the environment and the outcome did not moderate the effect sizes. Thus far, the COMT Val158Met polymorphism fails to explain the differences in sensitivity to environment. Future studies might incorporate more factors, such as polygenic effects of genetic pathways, epigenetics (EpiG) processing and sexual dimorphism, into the COMT-environment interaction equation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Youth & Adolescence is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | To date, several gene-by-environment (G×E) meta-analyses have been conducted to provide cumulative G×E evidence from previous inconsistent empirical studies; however, these meta-analyses have mainly focused on the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR). The present study aimed to conduct the first meta-analysis that tested whether and how an important dopaminergic gene—the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene contributed to differences in child and adolescent environmental sensitivity. A total of 22 studies with 20,528 participants involving in various developmental outcomes (e.g., externalizing problems, emotional problems, cognitive development and social behaviors) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled effect size of environment-outcome associations in the Met-allele carriers (r = 0.11, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.15], p <.001) did not significantly differ from that in the Val/Val homozygotes (r = 0.14, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.20], p < 0.001) (Qcontrast (1) = 0.37, p = 0.54). The aggregated Liptak-Stouffer Z-score that combined the p-values of the COMT-environment interaction yield a nonsignificant result (p = 0.52). Moreover, outcome domain, sample age, ethnicity and assessment methods for the environment and the outcome did not moderate the effect sizes. Thus far, the COMT Val158Met polymorphism fails to explain the differences in sensitivity to environment. Future studies might incorporate more factors, such as polygenic effects of genetic pathways, epigenetics (EpiG) processing and sexual dimorphism, into the COMT-environment interaction equation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00472891 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10964-019-01004-3 |
