SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Parkinson disease polygenic risk score is associated with Parkinson disease status and age at onset but not with alpha-synuclein cerebrospinal fluid levels.

BMC Neurol · 2017-11-15

DOI: 10.1186/s12883-017-0978-zPMID: 29141588

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

BackgroundThe genetic architecture of Parkinson's Disease (PD) is complex and not completely understood. Multiple genetic studies to date have identified multiple causal genes and risk loci. Nevertheless, most of the expected genetic heritability remains unexplained. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) may provide greater statistical power and inform about the genetic architecture of multiple phenotypes. The aim of this study was to test the association between PRS and PD risk, age at onset and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (α-synuclein, Aβ1-42, t-tau and p-tau).MethodsThe weighted PRS was created using the genome-wide loci from Nalls et al., 2014 PD GWAs meta-analysis. The PRS was tested for association with PD status, age at onset and CSF biomarker levels in 829 cases and 432 controls of European ancestry.ResultsThe PRS was associated with PD status (p = 5.83×10-08) and age at onset (p = 5.70×10-07). The CSF t-tau levels showed a nominal association with the PRS (p = 0.02). However, CSF α-synuclein, amyloid beta and phosphorylated tau were not found to be associated with the PRS.ConclusionOur study suggests that there is an overlap in the genetic architecture of PD risk and onset, although the different loci present different weights for those phenotypes. In our dataset we found a marginal association of the PRS with CSF t-tau but not with α-synuclein CSF levels, suggesting that the genetic architecture for the CSF biomarker levels is different from that of PD risk.

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.