Sweet, Robert A.

Abstract Background Alzheimer's disease (AD) exhibits significant genetic heterogeneity, with no single model fully explaining its inheritance pattern. Structural variants (SVs) may contribute to the missing heritability of AD, particularly in disease pathology and familial AD, which remain largely unexplored. Method Structural variants (SVs) were analyzed in unrelated 1,162 individuals from the ROSMAP study (687 cognitively normal (CN), 475 AD patients), as well as 197 Non‐Hispanic White (NHW) families (926 individuals, 58.5% with AD) and 214 Caribbean Hispanic (CH) families (1,340 individuals, 59.17% with AD). Large insertions and deletions were identified using Manta, Absinthe, and MELT from whole‐genome sequencing, supplemented by Sniffles2 and external SV call sets. This approach generated a unified VCF file containing 45,251 insertions and 76,566 deletions. After filtering for missingness rate and allele counts, a total of 9,290 insertions and 9,529 deletions were retained for analysis. Genome‐wide SV analyses were performed with AD‐related metrics in ROSMAP, adjusting for age, sex, and principal components, and validated in an independent ADSP replication cohort comprising 29,055 unrelated individuals (17,110 CN and 11,945 AD patients). Result We identified nine SVs (one insertion and eight deletions) segregating in AD families. An insertion near PDCD10 in NHW families reached genome‐wide significance ( p <5×10 ‐8 ) for AD risk in the replication cohort. Two deletions in KIF26B and SPHKAP were found in both CH and NHW families, while five appeared only in NHW and one in CH. All eight deletions showed genome‐wide significance for AD risk. SV GWAS on AD pathologies in ROSMAP revealed an insertion in INPP4B with the strongest association to global brain pathology (β=0.19; p = 2.32×10 ‐5 ), also linked to pathological AD, diffuse plaques, and Braak staging. A deletion near ADGRB1 (β=1.53; p = 5.05×10 ‐6 ) was associated with neuritic plaques, and another near ARMC2 (β=1.66; p = 2.17×10 ‐6 ) was linked to diffuse plaques. All three SVs associated with AD ( p <5×10 ‐6 ) in replication. Conclusion Our findings reveal numerous SVs segregating in familial AD across both CH and NHW families, as well as additional SVs linked to sporadic AD. Prioritizing these SVs based on their potential effects on gene function and expression will provide deeper insight into their contributions to both familial and sporadic AD.

AbstractBackgroundLate‐Onset Alzheimer’s Disease (LOAD) is characterized by genetic heterogeneity and there is no single model explaining the genetic mode of inheritance. To date, more than 70 genetic loci associated with AD have been identified but they explain only a small proportion of AD heritability. Structural variants (SVs) may explain some of the missing AD heritability, and specifically, their segregation in AD families has yet to be investigated.MethodWe analyzed WGS data from 197 NHW families (926 subjects, 58.5% affected) and 214 CH families (1,340 subjects, 59.17% affected). Manta, Absinthe, and MELT were used for large insertions/deletions calling from short‐read WGS, combined with Sniffles2 calls from 4 ONT‐sequenced genomes and an external SV call set from HGSVC on 32 PacBio‐sequenced genomes from the 1000 Genomes Project. Genotyping produced a unified project‐level VCF. We identified 45,251 insertions and 76,566 deletions genome‐wide. Variants were tested for segregation and pathogenicity using Annot‐SV, cadd‐SV, and Variant Effect Predictor. Segregation required SV presence in all affected family members and only in unaffected members five years younger than average disease onset.ResultWe identified 453 insertions and 598 deletions segregating in 78.68% and 87.31% of NHW families, respectively. In CH families, 432 insertions and 460 deletions were segregating in 75.23% and 72.90% of the families, respectively. Genes overlapping with the SVs exhibited high expression levels in brain tissues. Notably, around 93% of insertions and 76% of deletions segregating in NHW and CH families were less than 1 kilobase pair (1kbp) in length. A total of 79 insertions and 96 deletions were found to be segregating in both NHW and CH families. Interestingly, a segregating insertion was observed in CH families overlapping within the CACNA2D3 gene, which was previously reported in a CH GWAS for clinical AD. A deletion segregating in NHW overlapped with the PSEN1, and another in a CH family overlapped with the PTK2B gene.ConclusionOur findings suggested that there are several SVs associated with familial AD across CH and NHW families. Prioritizing the SVs based on their effects on gene function and expression will be helpful in understanding their contributions in AD.

Abstract BACKGROUND Few rare variants have been identified in genetic loci from genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) of Alzheimer's disease (AD), limiting understanding of mechanisms, risk assessment, and genetic counseling. METHODS Using genome sequencing data from 197 families in the National Institute on Aging Alzheimer's Disease Family Based Study and 214 Caribbean Hispanic families, we searched for rare coding variants within known GWAS loci from the largest published study. RESULTS Eighty‐six rare missense or loss‐of‐function (LoF) variants completely segregated in 17.5% of families, but in 91 (22.1%) families Apolipoprotein E ( APOE)‐ 𝜀4 was the only variant segregating. However, in 60.3% of families, APOE 𝜀4, missense, and LoF variants were not found within the GWAS loci. DISCUSSION Although APOE 𝜀4and several rare variants were found to segregate in both family datasets, many families had no variant accounting for their disease. This suggests that familial AD may be the result of unidentified rare variants. Highlights Rare coding variants from GWAS loci segregate in familial Alzheimer's disease. Missense or loss of function variants were found segregating in nearly 7% of families. APOE‐𝜀4 was the only segregating variant in 29.7% in familial Alzheimer's disease. In Hispanic and non‐Hispanic families, different variants were found in segregating genes. No coding variants were found segregating in many Hispanic and non‐Hispanic families.

AbstractObjectiveTo compute penetrance and recurrence risk using a genome‐wide PRS (including and excluding the APOE region) in families with Alzheimer's disease.MethodsGenotypes from the National Institute on Aging Late‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Family‐Based Study and a study of familial Alzheimer's disease in Caribbean Hispanics were used to compute PRS with and without variants in the 2 MB region flanking APOE. PRS was calculated in using clumping/thresholding and Bayesian methods and was assessed for association with Alzheimer's disease and age at onset. Penetrance and recurrence risk for carriers in highest and lowest PRS quintiles were compared separately within APOE‐ε4 carriers and non‐carriers.ResultsPRS excluding the APOE region was strongly associated with clinical and neuropathological diagnosis of AD. PRS association with AD was similar in participants who did not carry an APOE‐ε4 allele (OR = 1.74 [1.53–1.91]) compared with APOE‐ε4 carriers (1.53 [1.4–1.68]). Compared to the lowest quintile, the highest PRS quintile had a 10% higher penetrance at age 70 (p = 0.0006) and a 20% higher penetrance at age 80 (p < 10e‐05). Stratifying by APOE‐ε4 allele, PRS in the highest quintile was significantly more penetrant than the lowest quintile, both, within APOE‐ε4 carriers (14.5% higher at age 80, p = 0.002) and non‐carriers (26% higher at 80, p < 10e‐05). Recurrence risk for siblings conferred by a co‐sibling in the highest PRS quintile increased from 4% between the ages of 65–74 years to 39% at age 85 and older.InterpretationPRS can be used to estimate penetrance and recurrence risk in familial Alzheimer's disease among carriers and non‐carries of APOE‐ε4.

Background: Psychotic symptoms are common in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and related neurodegenerative disorders and are associated with more rapid disease progression and increased mortality. It is unclear to what degree existing criteria are utilized in clinical research and practice. Objective: To establish research criteria for the diagnosis of psychosis in AD. Methods: The International Society to Advance Alzheimer’s Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (NPS) Professional Interest Area (PIA) psychosis subgroup reviewed existing criteria for psychosis in AD and related dementias. Through a series of in person and on-line meetings, a priority checklist was devised to capture features necessary for current research and clinical needs. PubMed, Medline and other relevant databases were searched for relevant criteria. Results: Consensus identified three sets of criteria suitable for review including those of Jeste and Finkel, Lyketsos, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 5th edition. It was concluded that existing criteria could be augmented by including a more specific differentiation between delusions and hallucinations, address overlap with related conditions (agitation in particular), adding the possibility of symptoms emerging in the preclinical and prodromal phases, and building on developing research in disease biomarkers. Conclusion: We propose criteria, developed to improve phenotypic classification of psychosis in AD, and advance the research agenda in the field to improve epidemiological, biomarker, and genetics research in the field. These criteria serve as a complement to the International Psychogeriatric Association criteria for psychosis in neurocognitive disorders.

Introduction: In 2015, the US Alzheimer’s Disease Centers (ADC) implemented Version 3 of the Uniform Data Set (UDS). This paper describes the history of Version 3 development and the UDS data that are freely available to researchers. Methods: UDS Version 3 was developed after years of coordination between the National Institute on Aging-appointed Clinical Task Force (CTF), clinicians from ∼30 ADCs, and the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC). The CTF recognized the need for updates to align with the state of the science in dementia research, while being flexible to the diverse needs and diseases studied at the ADCs. Version 3 also developed a nonproprietary neuropsychological battery. Results: This paper focuses on the substantial Version 3 changes to the UDS forms related to clinical diagnosis and characterization of clinical symptoms to match updated consensus-based diagnostic criteria. Between March 2015 and March 2018, 4820 participants were enrolled using UDS Version 3. Longitudinal data were available for 25,337 of the 37,568 total participants using all UDS versions. Discussion: The results from utilization of the UDS highlight the possibility for numerous research institutions to successfully collaborate, produce, and use standardized data collection instruments for over a decade.