4.3 Article

Explorative results from multistep screening for potential genetic risk loci of Alzheimer's disease in the longitudinal VITA study cohort

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURAL TRANSMISSION
Volume 125, Issue 1, Pages 77-87

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00702-017-1796-6

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; Cohort study; Genotyping microarray; Pooled DNA analysis; Candidate gene identification

Funding

  1. Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Aging Research (Vienna, Austria)
  2. Alzheimer Forschung Initiative e.V. (AFI) [09802]
  3. Interdisziplinares Zentrum fur Klinische Forschung (IZKF) Grant [Z-6]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that preferentially affects individuals of advanced age. Heritability estimates for AD range between 60 and 80%, but only few genetic risk factors have been identified so far. In the present explorative study, we aimed at characterizing the genetic contribution to late-onset AD in participants of the Vienna Transdanube Aging (VITA) longitudinal birth cohort study in a two-step approach. First, we performed a genome-wide screen of pooled DNA samples (n = 588) to identify allele frequency differences between AD patients and non-AD individuals using life-time diagnoses made at the age of 80 (t = 60 months). This analysis suggested a high proportion of brain-expressed genes required for cell adhesion, cell signaling and cell morphogenesis, and also scored in known AD risk genes. In a second step, we confirmed associations using individual genotypes of top-ranked markers examining AD diagnoses as well as the dimensional scores: FULD and MMSE determined up to the age of 82.5 (t = 90 months). Taken together, our study proposes genes ANKS1B, ENST00000414107, LOC100505811, SLC22A14, QRFPR, ZDHHC8P1, ADAMTS3 and PPFIA1 as possible new candidates involved in the etiology of late-onset AD, with further research being needed to clarify their exact roles.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available