Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging

Living Edition
| Editors: Danan Gu, Matthew E. Dupre

Consortium on Interplay of Genes and Environment Across Multiple Studies

  • Brian Karl FinchEmail author
  • Nancy L. Pedersen
  • Margaret Gatz
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69892-2_648-1

Overview

The Interplay of Genes and Environment across Multiple Studies (IGEMS) group is a consortium of longitudinal twin studies of adult development and aging established a decade ago to explore the nature of social context effects and gene-environment interplay in late-life functioning. The combined data contains information from over 50,000 individual participants aged 25–102 at baseline (including nearly 20,000 complete twin pairs) with median follow-up of 9.5 years. Studies include measures of aging-relevant outcomes in three broad domains: physical health and functional ability, psychological well-being (emotional stability/depression), and cognitive health. Studies also include multiple indicators of the social environment, spanning early childhood through late adulthood, and, by virtue of different nationalities and birth years, encompass different environmental contexts with respect to healthcare, retirement systems, and other social policies.

Research has firmly established...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

IGEMS is funded by NIH grants No. R01 AG037985, R01 AG059329, and R01 AG060470.

References

  1. Boardman JD, Daw J, Freese J (2013) Defining the environment in gene-environment research: lessons from social epidemiology. Am J Public Health 103(S1):S64–S72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Finkel D, Zavala C, For the IGEMS Consortium (2016) Sex differences in financial strain moderation of genetic influences on subjective health [abstract]. Gerontologist 56(S3):339Google Scholar
  3. Franz CE, Finkel D, Panizzon MS et al (2016) Facets of subjective health from early adulthood to old age. J Aging Health 29:149–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gatz M, Reynolds CA, Finkel D et al (2015) Data harmonization in aging research: not so fast. Exp Aging Res 41:475–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Johnson W, Krueger RF (2005) Genetic effects on physical health: lower at higher income levels. Behav Genet 35:579–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Johnson W, Dahl A, Pedersen N et al (2012) Education moderates genetic and environmental influences on body mass index: findings from the consortium on interplay of genes and environment across multiple studies (IGEMS) [abstract]. Gerontologist 52(S1):793Google Scholar
  7. McGue M, Osler M, Christensen K (2010) Causal inference and observational aging research: the utility of twins. Perspect Psychol Sci 5:546–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mosing MA, Lundholm C, Cnattingius S et al (2018) Associations between birth characteristics and age-related cognitive impairment and dementia: a registry based cohort study. PLoS Med 15:e1002609.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pahlen S, Hamdi NR, Dahl Aslan AK et al (2018) Age-moderation of genetic and environmental contributions to cognitive functioning in mid- and late-life for specific cognitive abilities. Intelligence 68:70–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Petersen I, Pedersen NL, Rantanen T et al (2016) GxE interaction influences trajectories of hand grip strength. Behav Genet 46:20–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Petkus AJ, Beam CR, Johnson W et al (2017) Gene–environment interplay in depressive symptoms: moderation by age, sex, and physical illness. Psychol Med 47:1836–1847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Reiss D, Leve LD, Neiderhiser J (2013) How genes and the social environment moderate each other. Am J Public Health 103(S1):S111–S121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Reynolds CA, Gatz M, Christensen K et al (2016) Gene-environment interplay in physical, psychological, and cognitive domains in mid to late adulthood: is APOE a variability gene? Behav Genet 46:4–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schmalhausen II (1946) Factors of evolution: the theory of stabilizing selection. Blakiston, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  15. Shanahan MJ, Hofer SM (2005) Social context in gene–environment interactions: retrospect and prospect. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 60(S1):65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. van der Sluis S, Posthuma D, Dolan CV (2012) A note on false positives and power in G x E modelling of twin data. Behav Genet 42:170–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zavala C, Beam CR, Finch B et al (2018) Testing gene-environment interaction in various cognitive domains. Dev Psychol 54:2356–2370CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Karl Finch
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Nancy L. Pedersen
    • 3
  • Margaret Gatz
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Center for Economic and Social ResearchUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Sociology & Spatial SciencesUniverity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Department of Medical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsKarolinska InstituteStockholmSweden
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniverity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Matthew E. Dupre
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Population Health SciencesDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Center for the Study of Aging and Human DevelopmentDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  3. 3.Department of SociologyDuke UniversityDurhamUSA