Foroud, Tatiana

Abstract To elucidate the molecular basis of multiple system atrophy (MSA), a neurodegenerative disease, we conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in a Japanese MSA case/control series followed by replication studies in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, European, and North American samples. In the GWAS stage, rs2303744 on chromosome 19 showed a suggestive association (P = 6.5 × 10− 7) that was replicated in additional Japanese samples (P = 2.9 × 10− 6, odds ratio (OR) = 1.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.30–1.91), and then confirmed as highly significant in a meta-analysis of East Asian population data (P = 5.0 × 10− 15, OR = 1.49; 95% CI 1.35–1.65). The association of rs2303744 with MSA remained significant in combined European/North American samples (P = 0.017, OR = 1.12; 95% CI 1.02–1.23) despite allele frequencies being quite different between these populations. rs2303744 leads to an amino acid substitution in PLA2G4C that encodes the cPLA2γ lysophospholipase/transacylase. The cPLA2γ-Ile143 isoform encoded by the MSA risk allele has significantly decreased transacylase activity compared with the alternate cPLA2γ-Val143 isoform, and may perturb membrane phospholipids and promote oligodendroglial pathology.

AbstractBackgroundWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use at the midway point of data collection of the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer’s Disease Study (LEADS). We compared amyloid‐positive early‐onset Alzheimer’s disease (EOAD) participants and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s disease [EOnonAD]) participants across NPS domains and psychotropic medication categories.Method282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid‐negative EOnonAD (n = 70). All participants were between ages 40 and 64 at baseline. NPS were measured with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire (NPI‐Q) and Geriatric Depression Scale – Short Form (GDS‐SF). Medications were categorized into psychotropic category (e.g., antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines). Groups were compared on NPI‐Q using binary logistic regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, on GDS‐SF using linear regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, and on psychotropic medication use using Chi square or Fisher’s exact test.ResultDemographic data are presented in Table 1. Average total NPI‐Q score was higher in EOnonAD than EOAD (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). Regardless of diagnostic group, informants endorsed Affective behaviors most frequently (76.2%). EOAD informants endorsed fewer Distress‐Tension behaviors (p = .02, OR = .498) and Impulse Control behaviors (p = .01, OR = .438). EOAD informants also endorsed apathy (p < .001, OR = .316), irritability (p = .02, OR = .498), and disinhibition (p = .04, OR = .476) at lower frequency than EOnonAD. GDS‐SF showed that the EOnonAD participants self‐reported more symptoms of depression than the EOAD group (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). (Table 2A). A minority of participants, regardless of diagnostic group, reported psychotropic medication use (35%). There was higher use in EOnonAD (38%) than EOAD (24%) (p = .03, Cohen W = .14) (Table 2B).ConclusionNPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants, despite EOnonAD being less severely impaired. LEADS continues to collect data. Future studies will examine etiologies that may be larger drivers of NPS than AD neuropathology, mediators (e.g., race, ethnicity) in the association between NPS and diagnostic group classication, compare NPS in EOAD vs. LOAD, and examine longitudinal changes in neuropsychiatric profiles.

AbstractBackgroundApproximately 10‐25% of amnestic early‐onset dementia are negative for amyloid (Early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s Disease, EOnonAD). EOnonAD is a heterogenous group with various etiologies. In order to better understand the traits of EOnonAD, we clustered amnestic EOnonAD individuals according to cognitive patterns.MethodCognitive data of 62 EOnonAD individuals from the Longitudinal Early‐onset AD study (LEADS) were Z‐normalized to 91 intact individuals after adjusting for age, sex, and education. This led to domain‐averaged composite Z‐scores for memory, language, speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function. Cluster analysis using the Ward method on the residuals for the five composites was performed. We used Scree plot using the pseudo T‐squared to determine the optimal number of clusters. We compared demographics, imaging biomarkers (amyloid and tau PET SUVR, hippocampal volume), plasma (pTau231, Aß40, Aß42, glial fibrillary acidic protein, and neurofilament light chain (NfL)), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (Aß42/40, NfL, Neurogranin, Visinin‐like protein, YKL‐40, and Synaptosome Associated Protein 25) across the clusters after adjusting for age, sex, and education. We compared gray matter density of each EOnonAD cluster to controls (n = 84) using voxel‐wise multiple linear regressions in SPM12, adjusting for age, sex, education, and intracranial volume.ResultScree plot using the pseudo‐T‐squared suggested three clusters. Cluster 1 (38/62, 61.3%) was characterized by having the mildest cognitive impairment in all domains. Cluster 2 (19/62, 30.6%) was characterized by more severe memory and language impairment. Cluster 3 (5/62, 8.1%) was characterized by more severe impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function (Table 1). Cluster 3 showed significantly higher NfL for both plasma (Cluster 1 vs 3, p<0.001; Cluster 2 vs 3, p < 0.004) and CSF (Cluster 1 vs 3, p = 0.001). Other biomarkers did not show significant difference (Table 1). Only Cluster 3 showed significant atrophy in the bilateral fronto‐parietal areas at p<0.01, uncorrected (Figure 1).ConclusionWe identified heterogeneity in cognitive patterns among amnestic EOnonAD individuals. Cluster 1 had mildest cognitive impairment; Cluster 2 had predominant impairment in memory and language; and Cluster 3 had predominant impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function, with significant fronto‐parietal atrophy and high NfL indicating active neurodegeneration.

AbstractBackgroundGiven the rarity of genetic frontotemporal dementia (FTD), researchers across the world have come together to form the FTD Prevention Initiative (FPI) in an effort to improve prevention trials design. As this initiative begins to bring together large‐scale data from worldwide cohort series, including ALLFTD in North America and GENFI in Europe and Canada, it is critical for FPI to quantify the level of relatedness between all participants. Here we provide the most recent update to these ongoing analyses.MethodsGenome‐wide SNP genotyping data from 1,684 ALLFTD and 568 GENFI participants was used to perform lineage analyses using PLINK. Briefly, QC was performed similarly in all datasets to remove individuals with low call rate and filter autosomal SNPs for missingness, frequency, and deviation from Hardy‐Weinberg equilibrium. Genetic ancestry was inferred by projecting genotyped samples into the principal components of the 1000 Genomes reference panel, using R package bigsnpr. Overlapping ALLFTD and GENFI genotyping data was then used, in a two‐stage approach, to calculate pairwise identity‐by‐descent (IBD) estimates and KING coefficients, followed by family‐network identification and pedigree reconstruction using PRIMUS.ResultsFirst, we calculated IBD estimates among all participants by restricting pairs to those with estimates>0.1875 (up to second‐degree relatives). Overall, we identified a total of 292 second‐degree family networks, including 168 ALLFTD and 120 GENFI families, mostly associated with pathogenic variants in the 3 major FTD‐causing genes. We also identified 4 family networks with participants enrolled in both the ALLFTD and GENFI series, as well as several multi‐site families within the ALLFTD consortium. This first, overall approach allowed us to predict close relationships even between individuals with different ancestral backgrounds, including at least 4 confirmed admixed families. More distant relationships were also detected within ALLFTD and GENFI by performing ancestry‐based analysis among participants with estimated European ancestry, using the KING‐robust algorithm.ConclusionsThese lineage analyses allowed us to identify, otherwise unknown, close (and distant) relatives from different study sites, as well as within the ALLFTD and GENFI series. This dataset will be a crucial resource to increase statistical accuracy and power in upcoming collaborative FPI studies.

AbstractBackgroundStructural variants range from simple loss or gain of genetic material to complex events that restructure entire chromosomes. This heterogeneity coupled with variant size greater than sequencing read‐length makes structural variant mapping from short‐read sequencing data difficult and error‐prone. Consequently, the role of structural variants is poorly explored in many phenotypes, including dementia.MethodWe used the GATK‐SV pipeline that combines four external structural variant mapping algorithms with machine‐learning to build high‐quality consensus structural variant calls. We applied GATK‐SV to short‐read whole‐genome sequencing data of 2,601 frontotemporal dementia‐amyotrophic lateral sclerosis spectrum (FTD/ALS) patients, 2,612 Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients, and 4,132 neurologically unaffected participants.ResultAfter stringent quality‐control, we performed genome‐wide association studies on 2,307 ALS/FTD patients versus 3,677 controls with 4,699 common structural variants and 2,355 LBD patients versus 3,700 controls with 4,889 common structural variants. In the FTD/ALS cohort, we identified well‐known risk variants at the C9orf72 (p‐value = 4.99×10‐18, OR = 14.47, 95% CI = 7.90–26.49) and MAPT loci (p‐value = 3.48×10‐6, OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.68–0.86) corroborating the ability of our pipeline to identify disease‐associated structural variants. Moreover, we discovered, replicated, and validated TPCN1 as a novel risk locus for LBD (p‐value = 9.18×10‐6, OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.22–1.67). Further, we identified rare exonic variants with known pathogenic or likely pathogenic effects, such as an SNCA gene duplication in LBD and a deletion of exons 1 and 2 in CHCHD10 in FTD/ALS. We additionally observed structural variants in regulatory regions, e.g. a deletion of a key PSEN2 enhancer, which resulted in an approximate 0.70 fold‐change in PSEN2 expression in LBD. Finally, we built an interactive web app where structural variants can be visualized and explored (https://ndru-ndrs-lng-nih.shinyapps.io/non_ad_dementias_sv_app/).ConclusionCommon and rare structural variants play a role in LBD and FTD/ALS. Our structural variant resource is publicly available and can be used to further explore the role of structural variants in LBD and FTD/ALS.