Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 11;21(1):13.
doi: 10.1186/s10194-020-01087-5.

Genetic Variants in Migraine: A Field Synopsis and Systematic Re-Analysis of Meta-Analyses

Free PMC article

Genetic Variants in Migraine: A Field Synopsis and Systematic Re-Analysis of Meta-Analyses

Yating Zhao et al. J Headache Pain. .
Free PMC article


Objective: Numerous genetic variants from meta-analyses of observational studies and GWAS were reported to be associated with migraine susceptibility. However, due to the random errors in meta-analyses, the noteworthiness of the results showing statistically significant remains doubtful. Thus, we performed this field synopsis and re-analysis study to evaluate the noteworthiness using a Bayesian approach in hope of finding true associations.

Methods: Relevant meta-analyses from observational studies and GWAS examining correlation between all genetic variants and migraine risk were included in our study by a PubMed search. Identification of noteworthy associations were analyzed by false-positive rate probability (FPRP) and Bayesian false discovery probability (BFDP). Using noteworthy variants, GO enrichment analysis were conducted through DAVID online tool. Then, the PPI network and hub genes were performed using STRING database and CytoHubba software.

Results: As for 8 significant genetic variants from observational studies, none of which showed noteworthy at prior probability of 0.001. Out of 47 significant genetic variants in GWAS, 36 were noteworthy at prior probability of 0.000001 via FPRP or BFDP. We further found the pathways "positive regulation of cytosolic calcium ion concentration" and "inositol phosphate-mediated signaling" and hub genes including MEF2D, TSPAN2, PHACTR1, TRPM8 and PRDM16 related to migraine susceptibility.

Conclusion: Herein, we have identified several noteworthy variants for migraine susceptibility in this field synopsis. We hope these data would help identify novel genetic biomarkers and potential therapeutic target for migraine.

Keywords: BFDP; FPRP; GWAS; Genetic variant; Meta-analysis; Migraine.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The flow chart of the articles screening and selection
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Gene ontology enrichment analysis of migraine. The cut-off P-value for this analysis was 0.05 (−log P-value = 1.3)

Similar articles

See all similar articles


    1. Diener HC, et al. Integrated care for chronic migraine patients: epidemiology, burden, diagnosis and treatment options. Clin Med (Lond) 2015;15(4):344–350. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.15-4-344. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Collaborators GBDH. Global, regional, and national burden of migraine and tension-type headache, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(11):954–976. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30322-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Younger DS. Epidemiology of migraine. Neurol Clin. 2016;34(4):849–861. doi: 10.1016/j.ncl.2016.06.011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Disease, G.B.D., I. Injury, and C. Prevalence Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053):1545–1602. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31678-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. MacGregor EA. Migraine. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(7):ITC49–ITC64. doi: 10.7326/AITC201704040. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources