SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Association Study of <i>TAF1</i> Variants in Parkinson's Disease.

Front Neurosci · 2022-04-08

DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.846095PMID: 35464305

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

Increasing evidence reveals sex as an important factor in the development of Parkinson's disease (PD), but associations between genes on the sex chromosomes and PD remain unknown. TAF1 is a gene located on the X chromosome which is known to cause X-linked syndromic mental retardation-33 (MRXS33) and X-linked Dystonia-Parkinsonism (XDP). In this study, we conducted whole-exome sequencing (WES) among 1,917 patients with early-onset or familial PD and 1,652 controls in a Chinese population. We detected a hemizygous frameshift variant c.29_53dupGGA(CAG)2CTACCATCA(CTG)2C (p.A19Dfs*50) in two unrelated male patients. Further segregation analysis showed an unaffected family member carried this variant, which suggested the penetrance of the variant may be age-related and incomplete. To verify the effects of TAF1 on PD, genetic analyses were carried separately by gender. Analysis of rare variants by optimal sequence kernel association (SKAT-O) test showed a nominally significant difference in variant burden between the male PD patients and controls (2.01 vs. 1.38%, p = 0.027). In the female group, none of the variant types showed significant association with PD in this study. In conclusion, we found rare variants in TAF1 may be implicated in PD, but further genetic and functional analyses were needed.

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.