SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Replication of a Novel Parkinson's Locus in a European Ancestry Population.

Mov Disord · 2021-03-24

DOI: 10.1002/mds.28546PMID: 33760272

Check source for accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundA recently published East Asian genome-wide association study of Parkinson;s disease (PD) reported 2 novel risk loci, SV2C and WBSCR17.ObjectivesThe objective of this study were to determine whether recently reported novel SV2C and WBSCR17 loci contribute to the risk of developing PD in European and East Asian ancestry populations.MethodsWe report an association analysis of recently reported variants with PD in the COURAGE-PD cohort (9673 PD patients; 8465 controls) comprising individuals of European and East Asian ancestries. In addition, publicly available summary data (41,386 PD patients; 476,428 controls) were pooled.ResultsOur findings confirmed the role of the SV2C variant in PD pathogenesis (rs246814, COURAGE-PD PEuropean  = 6.64 × 10-4 , pooled PD P = 1.15 × 10-11 ). The WBSCR17 rs9638616 was observed as a significant risk marker in the East Asian pooled population only (P = 1.16 × 10-8 ).ConclusionsOur comprehensive study provides an up-to-date summary of recently detected novel loci in different PD populations and confirmed the role of SV2C locus as a novel risk factor for PD irrespective of the population or ethnic group analyzed. © 2021 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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.