Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Parkinson's disease (PD) was recently found to be associated with HLA in a genome-wide association study (GWAS). Follow-up GWAS's replicated the PD-HLA association but their top hits differ. Do the different hits tag the same locus or is there more than one PD-associated variant within HLA? We show that the top GWAS hits are not correlated with each other (0.00≤r(2)≤0.15). Using our GWAS (2000 cases, 1986 controls) we conducted step-wise conditional analysis on 107 SNPs with P<10(-3) for PD-association; 103 dropped-out, four remained significant. Each SNP, when conditioned on the other three, yielded P(SNP1) = 5×10(-4), P(SNP2) = 5×10(-4), P(SNP3) = 4×10(-3) and P(SNP4) = 0.025. The four SNPs were not correlated (0.01≤r(2)≤0.20). Haplotype analysis (excluding rare SNP2) revealed increasing PD risk with increasing risk alleles from OR = 1.27, P = 5×10(-3) for one risk allele to OR = 1.65, P = 4×10(-8) for three. Using additional 843 cases and 856 controls we replicated the independent effects of SNP1 (P(conditioned-on-SNP4) = 0.04) and SNP4 (P(conditioned-on-SNP1) = 0.04); SNP2 and SNP3 could not be replicated. In pooled GWAS and replication, SNP1 had OR(conditioned-on-SNP4) = 1.23, P(conditioned-on-SNP4) = 6×10(-7); SNP4 had OR(conditioned-on-SNP1) = 1.18, P(conditioned-on-SNP1) = 3×10(-3); and the haplotype with both risk alleles had OR = 1.48, P = 2×10(-12). Genotypic OR increased with the number of risk alleles an individual possessed up to OR = 1.94, P = 2×10(-11) for individuals who were homozygous for the risk allele at both SNP1 and SNP4. SNP1 is a variant in HLA-DRA and is associated with HLA-DRA, DRB5 and DQA2 gene expression. SNP4 is correlated (r(2) = 0.95) with variants that are associated with HLA-DQA2 expression, and with the top HLA SNP from the IPDGC GWAS (r(2) = 0.60). Our findings suggest more than one PD-HLA association; either different alleles of the same gene, or separate loci.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.