Intraocular pressure (IOP) is currently the sole modifiable risk factor for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), one of the leading causes of blindness worldwide1. Both IOP and POAG are highly heritable2. We report a combined analysis of participants from the UK Biobank (n = 103,914) and previously published data from the International Glaucoma Genetic Consortium (n = 29,578)3,4 that identified 101 statistically independent genome-wide-significant SNPs for IOP, 85 of which have not been previously reported4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12. We examined these SNPs in 11,018 glaucoma cases and 126,069 controls, and 53 SNPs showed evidence of association. Gene-based tests implicated an additional 22 independent genes associated with IOP. We derived an allele score based on the IOP loci and loci influencing optic nerve head morphology. In 1,734 people with advanced glaucoma and 2,938 controls, participants in the top decile of the allele score were at increased risk (odds ratio (OR) = 5.6; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.1–7.6) of glaucoma relative to the bottom decile.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


  1. 1.

    Weinreb, R. N. et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 2, 16067 (2016).

  2. 2.

    Sanfilippo, P. G., Hewitt, A. W., Hammond, C. J. & Mackey, D. A. The heritability of ocular traits. Surv. Ophthalmol. 55, 561–583 (2010).

  3. 3.

    Bycroft, C. et al. Genome-wide genetic data on ~500,000 UK Biobank participants. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/07/20/166298/ (2017).

  4. 4.

    Springelkamp, H. et al. New insights into the genetics of primary open-angle glaucoma based on meta-analyses of intraocular pressure and optic disc characteristics. Hum. Mol. Genet. 26, 438–453 (2017).

  5. 5.

    van Koolwijk, L. M. E. et al. Common genetic determinants of intraocular pressure and primary open-angle glaucoma. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002611 (2012).

  6. 6.

    Springelkamp, H. et al. ARHGEF12 influences the risk of glaucoma by increasing intraocular pressure. Hum. Mol. Genet. 24, 2689–2699 (2015).

  7. 7.

    Bailey, J. N. C. et al. Genome-wide association analysis identifies TXNRD2, ATXN2 and FOXC1 as susceptibility loci for primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 48, 189–194 (2016).

  8. 8.

    Gharahkhani, P. et al. Common variants near ABCA1, AFAP1 and GMDS confer risk of primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 46, 1120–1125 (2014).

  9. 9.

    Hysi, P. G. et al. Genome-wide analysis of multi-ancestry cohorts identifies new loci influencing intraocular pressure and susceptibility to glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 46, 1126–1130 (2014).

  10. 10.

    Chen, Y. et al. Common variants near ABCA1 and in PMM2 are associated with primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 46, 1115–1119 (2014).

  11. 11.

    Burdon, K. P. et al. Genome-wide association study identifies susceptibility loci for open angle glaucoma at TMCO1 and CDKN2B-AS1. Nat. Genet. 43, 574–578 (2011).

  12. 12.

    Thorleifsson, G. et al. Common variants near CAV1 and CAV2 are associated with primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 42, 906–909 (2010).

  13. 13.

    Vithana, E. N. et al. Genome-wide association analyses identify three new susceptibility loci for primary angle closure glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 44, 1142–1146 (2012).

  14. 14.

    Khor, C. C. et al. Genome-wide association study identifies five new susceptibility loci for primary angle closure glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 48, 556–562 (2016).

  15. 15.

    Yang, J. et al. Conditional and joint multiple-SNP analysis of GWAS summary statistics identifies additional variants influencing complex traits. Nat. Genet. 44, 369–75 (2012).

  16. 16.

    Lu, Y. et al. Genome-wide association analyses identify multiple loci associated with central corneal thickness and keratoconus. Nat. Genet. 45, 155–163 (2013).

  17. 17.

    Yang, J. et al. Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height. Nat. Genet. 42, 565–569 (2010).

  18. 18.

    Bulik-Sullivan, B. K. et al. LD Score regression distinguishes confounding from polygenicity in genome-wide association studies. Nat. Genet. 47, 291–295 (2015).

  19. 19.

    Ramdas, W. D. et al. A genome-wide association study of optic disc parameters. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000978 (2010).

  20. 20.

    Bulik-Sullivan, B. et al. An atlas of genetic correlations across human diseases and traits. Nat. Genet. 47, 1236–1241 (2015).

  21. 21.

    Bakshi, A. et al. Fast set-based association analysis using summary data from GWAS identifies novel gene loci for human complex traits. Sci. Rep. 6, 32894 (2016).

  22. 22.

    de Leeuw, C. A., Mooij, J. M., Heskes, T. & Posthuma, D. MAGMA: generalized gene-set analysis of GWAS data. PLOS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004219 (2015).

  23. 23.

    Pers, T. H. et al. Biological interpretation of genome-wide association studies using predicted gene functions. Nat. Commun. 6, 5890 (2015).

  24. 24.

    Reis, L. M. & Semina, E. V. Genetics of anterior segment dysgenesis disorders. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 22, 314–324 (2011).

  25. 25.

    Ali, M. et al. Null mutations in LTBP2 cause primary congenital glaucoma. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 84, 664–671 (2009).

  26. 26.

    Souma, T. et al. Angiopoietin receptor TEK mutations underlie primary congenital glaucoma with variable expressivity. J. Clin. Invest. 126, 2575–2587 (2016).

  27. 27.

    Larsson, M. et al. GWAS findings for human iris patterns: associations with variants in genes that influence normal neuronal pattern development. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 89, 334–343 (2011).

  28. 28.

    Sundin, O. H. et al. Extreme hyperopia is the result of null mutations in MFRP, which encodes a Frizzled-related protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 9553–9558 (2005).

  29. 29.

    Khan, A. O. Microcornea with myopic chorioretinal atrophy, telecanthus and posteriorly-rotated ears: a distinct clinical syndrome. Ophthalmic Genet. 33, 196–199 (2012).

  30. 30.

    Vollrath, D. et al. Loss-of-function mutations in the LIM-homeodomain gene, LMX1B, in nail-patella syndrome. Hum. Mol. Genet. 7, 1091–1098 (1998).

  31. 31.

    Sweeney, E., Fryer, A., Mountford, R., Green, A. & McIntosh, I. Nail patella syndrome: a review of the phenotype aided by developmental biology. J. Med. Genet. 40, 153–162 (2003).

  32. 32.

    Souzeau, E. et al. Australian and New Zealand Registry of Advanced Glaucoma: methodology and recruitment. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 40, 569–575 (2012).

  33. 33.

    Quigley, H. A. & Broman, A. T. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 90, 262–267 (2006).

  34. 34.

    Ehlers, N., Bramsen, T. & Sperling, S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol. (Copenh.) 53, 34–43 (1975).

  35. 35.

    McCarthy, S. et al. A reference panel of 64,976 haplotypes for genotype imputation. Nat. Genet. 48, 1279–1283 (2016).

  36. 36.

    UK10K Consortium. The UK10K project identifies rare variants in health and disease. Nature 526, 82–90 (2015).

  37. 37.

    Chan, M. P. Y. et al. Associations with intraocular pressure in a large cohort: results from the UK Biobank. Ophthalmology 123, 771–782 (2016).

  38. 38.

    Kneehole, D. R. et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis identifies new endometriosis risk loci. Nat. Genet. 44, 1355–1359 (2012).

  39. 39.

    Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 559–575 (2007).

  40. 40.

    Delaneau, O., Marchini, J. & Zagury, J.-F. A linear complexity phasing method for thousands of genomes. Nat. Methods 9, 179–181 (2011).

  41. 41.

    Das, S. et al. Next-generation genotype imputation service and methods. Nat. Genet. 48, 1284–1287 (2016).

  42. 42.

    Loh, P.-R. et al. Efficient Bayesian mixed-model analysis increases association power in large cohorts. Nat. Genet. 47, 284–290 (2015).

  43. 43.

    Willer, C. J. et al. Newly identified loci that influence lipid concentrations and risk of coronary artery disease. Nat. Genet. 40, 161–169 (2008).

  44. 44.

    Andersson, R. et al. An atlas of active enhancers across human cell types and tissues. Nature 507, 455–461 (2014).

  45. 45.

    Griffith, M. et al. DGIdb: mining the druggable genome. Nat. Methods 10, 1209–1210 (2013).

  46. 46.

    Kim, D. et al. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 14, R36 (2013).

  47. 47.

    Anders, S., Pyl, P. T. & Huber, W. HTSeq: a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166–169 (2015).

  48. 48.

    McCarthy, D. J., Chen, Y. & Smyth, G. K. Differential expression analysis of multifactor RNA-Seq experiments with respect to biological variation. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 4288–4297 (2012).

Download references


This work was conducted by using the UK Biobank Resource (application number 25331) and publicly available data from the International Glaucoma Genetics Consortium. This work was supported by grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia (1107098 (J.E.C.), 1116360 (D.A.M.), 1116495 (J.E.C.) and 1023911 (D.A.M.)), the Ophthalmic Research Institute of Australia and the BrightFocus Foundation. S.M. is supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship. K.P.B., J.E.C. and A.W.H. are supported by NHMRC Fellowships. D.J.L. is supported by an EMBL Australia group leader award. We thank S. Wood and J. Pearson from QIMR Berghofer for IT support.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors jointly supervised this work: David A. Mackey, Puya Gharahkhani, Jamie E. Craig, Alex W. Hewitt.


  1. QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    • Stuart MacGregor
    • , Jue-Sheng Ong
    • , Jiyuan An
    • , Xikun Han
    • , Matthew H. Law
    • , Jonathan Beesley
    • , David C. Whiteman
    • , Graham L. Radford-Smith
    • , Nicholas G. Martin
    •  & Puya Gharahkhani
  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia

    • Tiger Zhou
    • , Owen M. Siggs
    • , Emmanuelle Souzeau
    • , Shiwani Sharma
    • , Bronwyn Sheldrick
    • , Richard A. Mills
    • , John Landers
    • , Kathryn P. Burdon
    •  & Jamie E. Craig
  3. South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    • David J. Lynn
  4. EMBL Australia Group, Infection & Immunity Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    • David J. Lynn
  5. College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia

    • David J. Lynn
  6. Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    • Jonathan B. Ruddle
    •  & Alex W. Hewitt
  7. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    • Stuart L. Graham
  8. Centre for Vision Research, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    • Paul R. Healey
    •  & Andrew J. R. White
  9. Discipline of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney Eye Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    • Paul R. Healey
    • , John R Grigg
    •  & Ivan Goldberg
  10. South Australian Institute of Ophthalmology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    • Robert J. Casson
  11. Eye Department, Greenlane Clinical Centre, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand

    • Stephen Best
  12. Garvan-Weizmann Centre for Cellular Genomics, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    • Joseph E. Powell
  13. St Vincent’s Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    • Joseph E. Powell
  14. University of Queensland School of Medicine, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    • Graham L. Radford-Smith
  15. Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    • Grant W. Montgomery
  16. Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

    • Kathryn P. Burdon
    • , David A. Mackey
    •  & Alex W. Hewitt
  17. Centre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia

    • David A. Mackey


  1. Search for Stuart MacGregor in:

  2. Search for Jue-Sheng Ong in:

  3. Search for Jiyuan An in:

  4. Search for Xikun Han in:

  5. Search for Tiger Zhou in:

  6. Search for Owen M. Siggs in:

  7. Search for Matthew H. Law in:

  8. Search for Emmanuelle Souzeau in:

  9. Search for Shiwani Sharma in:

  10. Search for David J. Lynn in:

  11. Search for Jonathan Beesley in:

  12. Search for Bronwyn Sheldrick in:

  13. Search for Richard A. Mills in:

  14. Search for John Landers in:

  15. Search for Jonathan B. Ruddle in:

  16. Search for Stuart L. Graham in:

  17. Search for Paul R. Healey in:

  18. Search for Andrew J. R. White in:

  19. Search for Robert J. Casson in:

  20. Search for Stephen Best in:

  21. Search for John R Grigg in:

  22. Search for Ivan Goldberg in:

  23. Search for Joseph E. Powell in:

  24. Search for David C. Whiteman in:

  25. Search for Graham L. Radford-Smith in:

  26. Search for Nicholas G. Martin in:

  27. Search for Grant W. Montgomery in:

  28. Search for Kathryn P. Burdon in:

  29. Search for David A. Mackey in:

  30. Search for Puya Gharahkhani in:

  31. Search for Jamie E. Craig in:

  32. Search for Alex W. Hewitt in:


S.M., A.W.H., J.E.C., P.G. and D.A.M. designed the study and obtained funding. S.M., J.S.O., J.A., X.H., T.Z., M.H.L., S.S., J.E.P., D.L. and J.B. analyzed the data. S.M., T.Z., O.S., E.S., S.S., B.S., R.A.M., J.L., J.B.R., S.L.G., P.R.H., A.J.R.W., R.J.C., S.B., J.R.G., I.G., D.C.W., G.R.S., N.G.M., G.W.M., K.P.B., D.A.M., J.E.C. and A.W.H. contributed to data collection and contributed to genotyping. S.M., J.S.O., D.A.M., P.G. and A.W.H. wrote the first draft of the paper. All authors contributed to the final version of the paper.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stuart MacGregor.

Supplementary Information

  1. Supplementary Text and Figures

    Supplementary Figures 1–8

  2. Reporting Summary

  3. Supplementary Table 1

    Statistically independent hits that are associated with IOP at the genome-wide significant level, that show at least P < 0.05 with glaucoma. SNPs which are significant after correction for multiple testing (101 SNPs) are shown in bold. This Table presents the results for IOP and glaucoma meta-analysis as well as for each substudy separately

  4. Supplementary Table 2

    Statistically independent hits that are associated with IOP at the genome-wide significant level, but are not associated (P > 0.05) with glaucoma, or were more strongly associated with corneal parameters. rs66724425 in ADAMTS6 is known to be associated with central corneal thickness, and SNPs rs1570204, rs78658973, rs12492846 and rs2797560, were more strongly associated with corneal hysteresis than they were with IOP

  5. Supplementary Table 3

    GCTA-fastBAT gene-based tests for IOP and the corresponding gene-based results for glaucoma. Of these 22 genes, 4 were significant at P< 0.05 with glaucoma

  6. Supplementary Table 4

    Enriched pathways for genes associated with IOP identified using MAGMA and 5,917 pre-specified Gene Ontology gene sets. The corresponding effect size and P value for each pathway in glaucoma is also displayed

  7. Supplementary Table 5

    Enriched pathways for genes associated with IOP identified using DEPICT, which uses 14,462 preconstituted gene sets are significantly enriched for genes in the trait-associated loci. The corresponding P value for each pathway in glaucoma is also displayed

  8. Supplementary Table 6

    Cell type implicated by analysis of the FANTOM5 Cap Analysis of Gene Expression dataset

About this article

Publication history