4.7 Article

Genetic screening of a large series of North American sporadic and familial frontotemporal dementia cases

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 118-130

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1002/alz.12011

Keywords

C9orf72; familial; frontotemporal dementia; GRN; MAPT; sporadic

Funding

  1. Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Clinical Research Consortium [U54NS092089]
  2. Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Fronto temporal Dementia Subjects [U01AG045390, R35 NS097261, P01 NS084974, R21NS099631, U01AG016976]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: The Advancing Research and Treatment for Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL) and Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS) consortia are two closely connected studies, involving multiple North American centers that evaluate both sporadic and familial frontotemporal dementia (FTD) participants and study longitudinal changes. Methods: We screened the major dementia-associated genes in 302 sporadic and 390 familial (symptomatic or at-risk) participants enrolled in these studies. Results: Among the sporadic patients, 16 (5.3%) carried chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72), microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT), and progranulin (GRN) pathogenic variants, whereas in the familial series we identified 207 carriers from 146 families. Of interest, one patient was found to carry a homozygous C9orf72 expansion, while another carried both a C9orf72 expansion and a GRN pathogenic variant. We also identified likely pathogenic variants in the TAR DNA binding protein (TARDBP), presenilin 1 (PSEN1), and valosin containing protein (VCP) genes, and a subset of variants of unknown significance in other rare FTD genes. Discussion: Our study reports the genetic characterization of a large FTD series and supports an unbiased sequencing screen, irrespective of clinical presentation or family history.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available