SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Genomics implicates adaptive and innate immunity in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.

Ann Clin Transl Neurol · 2016-11-04

DOI: 10.1002/acn3.369PMID: 28097204

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectivesWe assessed the current genetic evidence for the involvement of various cell types and tissue types in the etiology of neurodegenerative diseases, especially in relation to the neuroinflammatory hypothesis of neurodegenerative diseases.MethodsWe obtained large-scale genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics from Parkinson's disease (PD), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). We used multiple sclerosis (MS), an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system, as a positive control. We applied stratified LD score regression to determine if functional marks for cell type and tissue activity, and gene-set lists were enriched for genetic heritability. We compared our results to those from two gene-set enrichment methods (Ingenuity Pathway Analysis and enrichr).ResultsThere were no significant heritability enrichments for annotations marking genes active within brain regions, but there were significant heritability enrichments for annotations marking genes active within cell types that form part of both the innate and adaptive immune systems. We found this for MS (as expected) and also for AD and PD. The strongest signals were from the adaptive immune system (e.g., T cells) for PD, and from both the adaptive (e.g., T cells) and innate (e.g., CD14: a marker for monocytes, and CD15: a marker for neutrophils) immune systems for AD. Annotations from the liver were also significant for AD. Pathway analysis provided complementary results.InterpretationFor AD and PD, we found significant enrichment of heritability in annotations marking gene activity in immune cells.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.