SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The Role of Rare Coding Variants in Parkinson's Disease GWAS Loci.

Front Neurol · 2019-12-13

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2019.01284PMID: 31920912

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

Introduction: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified multiple loci associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) risk. The presence of rare variants within these loci that may account for the increased susceptibility requires further investigation. Methods: Using exome sequencing, we performed a comprehensive rare variant screen of genes located within 56 novel PD loci. We first analyzed exomes from 109 subjects in the discovery cohort (85 diagnosed with PD and 24 healthy controls) and filtered for rare coding variants with minor allele frequency 15. Further investigation of exome data from a replication cohort of 2,859 European patients with PD (International Parkinson's Disease Genomics Consortium) and 24,146 non-Finnish European controls from gnomAD were used for association testing of specific rare variants found in the discovery cohort. Results: Our genetic screening identified 54 potential disease-relevant variants in 71 genes in 109 subjects. Six out of 54 variants were found in two or more patients and were not observed in healthy controls: DNAH1 p.A3639T, STAB1 p.S1089G, ANK2 p.V3634D, ANK2 p.R3906W, SH3GL2 p.G276V, and NOD2 p.G908R. Replication in the International Parkinson's Disease Genomics Consortium (IPDGC) confirmed the association with PD risk for three out of the six identified variants (STAB1 p.S1089G, SH3GL2 p.G276V, and NOD2 p.G908R) (p -3). Conclusion: Our study suggests that some of the associations identified in PD risk loci can be ascribed to rare variants with likely functional effects that modify 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.