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.
Cerebral perfusion changes in presymptomatic genetic frontotemporal dementia: a GENFI study
Abstract Genetic forms of frontotemporal dementia are most commonly due to mutations in three genes, C9orf72, GRN or MAPT, with presymptomatic carriers from families representing those at risk. While cerebral blood flow shows differences between frontotemporal dementia and other forms of dementia, there is limited evidence of its utility in presymptomatic stages of frontotemporal dementia. This study aimed to delineate the cerebral blood flow signature of presymptomatic, genetic frontotemporal dementia using a voxel-based approach. In the multicentre GENetic Frontotemporal dementia Initiative (GENFI) study, we investigated cross-sectional differences in arterial spin labelling MRI-based cerebral blood flow between presymptomatic C9orf72, GRN or MAPT mutation carriers (n = 107) and non-carriers (n = 113), using general linear mixed-effects models and voxel-based analyses. Cerebral blood flow within regions of interest derived from this model was then explored to identify differences between individual gene carrier groups and to estimate a timeframe for the expression of these differences. The voxel-based analysis revealed a significant inverse association between cerebral blood flow and the expected age of symptom onset in carriers, but not non-carriers. Regions included the bilateral insulae/orbitofrontal cortices, anterior cingulate/paracingulate gyri, and inferior parietal cortices, as well as the left middle temporal gyrus. For all bilateral regions, associations were greater on the right side. After correction for partial volume effects in a region of interest analysis, the results were found to be largely driven by the C9orf72 genetic subgroup. These cerebral blood flow differences first appeared approximately 12.5 years before the expected symptom onset determined on an individual basis. Cerebral blood flow was lower in presymptomatic mutation carriers closer to and beyond their expected age of symptom onset in key frontotemporal dementia signature regions. These results suggest that arterial spin labelling MRI may be a promising non-invasive imaging biomarker for the presymptomatic stages of genetic frontotemporal dementia.
The Stroke Riskometer™ App: Validation of a Data Collection Tool and Stroke Risk Predictor
International Journal of Stroke | December 10, 2014 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 231-244
Background The greatest potential to reduce the burden of stroke is by primary prevention of first-ever stroke, which constitutes three quarters of all stroke. In addition to population-wide prevention strategies (the ‘mass’ approach), the ‘high risk’ approach aims to identify individuals at risk of stroke and to modify their risk factors, and risk, accordingly. Current methods of assessing and modifying stroke risk are difficult to access and implement by the general population, amongst whom most future strokes will arise. To help reduce the burden of stroke on individuals and the population a new app, the Stroke Riskometer™, has been developed. We aim to explore the validity of the app for predicting the risk of stroke compared with current best methods. Methods 752 stroke outcomes from a sample of 9501 individuals across three countries (New Zealand, Russia and the Netherlands) were utilized to investigate the performance of a novel stroke risk prediction tool algorithm (Stroke Riskometer™) compared with two established stroke risk score prediction algorithms (Framingham Stroke Risk Score [FSRS] and QStroke). We calculated the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curve (AUROC) with 95% confidence intervals, Harrels C-statistic and D-statistics for measure of discrimination, R2 statistics to indicate level of variability accounted for by each prediction algorithm, the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic for calibration, and the sensitivity and specificity of each algorithm. Results The Stroke Riskometer™ performed well against the FSRS five-year AUROC for both males (FSRS = 75·0% (95% CI 72·3%–77·6%), Stroke Riskometer™ = 74·0(95% CI 71·3%–76·7%) and females [FSRS = 70·3% (95% CI 67·9%–72·8%, Stroke Riskometer™ = 71·5% (95% CI 69·0%–73·9%)], and better than QStroke [males–59·7% (95% CI 57·3%–62·0%) and comparable to females = 71·1% (95% CI 69·0%–73·1%)]. Discriminative ability of all algorithms was low (C-statistic ranging from 0·51–0·56, D-statistic ranging from 0·01–0·12). Hosmer-Lemeshow illustrated that all of the predicted risk scores were not well calibrated with the observed event data ( P < 0·006). Conclusions The Stroke Riskometer™ is comparable in performance for stroke prediction with FSRS and QStroke. All three algorithms performed equally poorly in predicting stroke events. The Stroke Riskometer™ will be continually developed and validated to address the need to improve the current stroke risk scoring systems to more accurately predict stroke, particularly by identifying robust ethnic/race ethnicity group and country specific risk factors.