4.8 Article

Genome-wide association study of REM sleep behavior disorder identifies polygenic risk and brain expression effects

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-34732-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. Michael J. Fox Foundation [MJFF-020700]
  2. Fonds de recherche du Quebec (Doctoral Training Award)
  3. Parkinson Canada
  4. Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging
  5. Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF)
  6. Intramural Research Program of the National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services [ZO1 AG000535]
  7. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identifies five RBD risk loci and highlights the differential expression of SNCA-AS1 and SCARB2 genes in different brain regions. These findings provide further insights into the genetics of RBD and its potential for early intervention.
Rapid-eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD), enactment of dreams during REM sleep, is an early clinical symptom of alpha-synucleinopathies and defines a more severe subtype. The genetic background of RBD and its underlying mechanisms are not well understood. Here, we perform a genome-wide association study of RBD, identifying five RBD risk loci near SNCA, GBA, TMEM175, INPP5F, and SCARB2. Expression analyses highlight SNCA-AS1 and potentially SCARB2 differential expression in different brain regions in RBD, with SNCA-AS1 further supported by colocalization analyses. Polygenic risk score, pathway analysis, and genetic correlations provide further insights into RBD genetics, highlighting RBD as a unique alpha-synucleinopathy subpopulation that will allow future early intervention. REM-sleep behavior disorder often precedes Parkinson's disease or dementia. Here, the authors perform a genome-wide association study for REM-sleep behavior disorder, and discover how it potentially affects gene expression in the brain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据