Chris Kay1, Jennifer A Collins1, Zosia Miedzybrodzka1, Steven J Madore1, Erynn S Gordon1, Norman Gerry1, Mark Davidson1, Ramy A Slama1, Michael R Hayden2. 1. From the Centre for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics (C.K., J.A.C., R.A.S., M.R.H.), University of British Columbia, Canada; Medical Genetics Group (Z.M., M.D.), School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, UK; and Molecular Biology Group (S.J.M., E.S.G., N.G.), Coriell Institute for Medical Research, Camden, NJ. 2. From the Centre for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics (C.K., J.A.C., R.A.S., M.R.H.), University of British Columbia, Canada; Medical Genetics Group (Z.M., M.D.), School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, UK; and Molecular Biology Group (S.J.M., E.S.G., N.G.), Coriell Institute for Medical Research, Camden, NJ. mrh@cmmt.ubc.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To directly estimate the frequency and penetrance of CAG repeat alleles associated with Huntington disease (HD) in the general population. METHODS: CAG repeat length was evaluated in 7,315 individuals from 3 population-based cohorts from British Columbia, the United States, and Scotland. The frequency of ≥36 CAG alleles was assessed out of a total of 14,630 alleles. The general population frequency of reduced penetrance alleles (36-39 CAG) was compared to the prevalence of patients with HD with genetically confirmed 36-39 CAG from a multisource clinical ascertainment in British Columbia, Canada. The penetrance of 36-38 CAG repeat alleles for HD was estimated for individuals ≥65 years of age and compared against previously reported clinical penetrance estimates. RESULTS: A total of 18 of 7,315 individuals had ≥36 CAG, revealing that approximately 1 in 400 individuals from the general population have an expanded CAG repeat associated with HD (0.246%). Individuals with CAG 36-37 genotypes are the most common (36, 0.096%; 37, 0.082%; 38, 0.027%; 39, 0.000%; ≥40, 0.041%). General population CAG 36-38 penetrance rates are lower than penetrance rates extrapolated from clinical cohorts. CONCLUSION: HD alleles with a CAG repeat length of 36-38 occur at high frequency in the general population. The infrequent diagnosis of HD at this CAG length is likely due to low penetrance. Another important contributing factor may be reduced ascertainment of HD in those of older age.
OBJECTIVE: To directly estimate the frequency and penetrance of CAG repeat alleles associated with Huntington disease (HD) in the general population. METHODS: CAG repeat length was evaluated in 7,315 individuals from 3 population-based cohorts from British Columbia, the United States, and Scotland. The frequency of ≥36 CAG alleles was assessed out of a total of 14,630 alleles. The general population frequency of reduced penetrance alleles (36-39 CAG) was compared to the prevalence of patients with HD with genetically confirmed 36-39 CAG from a multisource clinical ascertainment in British Columbia, Canada. The penetrance of 36-38 CAG repeat alleles for HD was estimated for individuals ≥65 years of age and compared against previously reported clinical penetrance estimates. RESULTS: A total of 18 of 7,315 individuals had ≥36 CAG, revealing that approximately 1 in 400 individuals from the general population have an expanded CAG repeat associated with HD (0.246%). Individuals with CAG 36-37 genotypes are the most common (36, 0.096%; 37, 0.082%; 38, 0.027%; 39, 0.000%; ≥40, 0.041%). General population CAG 36-38 penetrance rates are lower than penetrance rates extrapolated from clinical cohorts. CONCLUSION:HD alleles with a CAG repeat length of 36-38 occur at high frequency in the general population. The infrequent diagnosis of HD at this CAG length is likely due to low penetrance. Another important contributing factor may be reduced ascertainment of HD in those of older age.
Authors: A Maat-Kievit; M Losekoot; H Van Den Boer-Van Den Berg; G J Van Ommen; M Niermeijer; M Breuning; A Tibben Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Sarah J Tabrizi; Rachael I Scahill; Gail Owen; Alexandra Durr; Blair R Leavitt; Raymund A Roos; Beth Borowsky; Bernhard Landwehrmeyer; Chris Frost; Hans Johnson; David Craufurd; Ralf Reilmann; Julie C Stout; Douglas R Langbehn Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Adam Auton; Lisa D Brooks; Richard M Durbin; Erik P Garrison; Hyun Min Kang; Jan O Korbel; Jonathan L Marchini; Shane McCarthy; Gil A McVean; Gonçalo R Abecasis Journal: Nature Date: 2015-10-01 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Galen E B Wright; Jennifer A Collins; Chris Kay; Cassandra McDonald; Egor Dolzhenko; Qingwen Xia; Kristina Bečanović; Britt I Drögemöller; Alicia Semaka; Charlotte M Nguyen; Brett Trost; Fiona Richards; Emilia K Bijlsma; Ferdinando Squitieri; Colin J D Ross; Stephen W Scherer; Michael A Eberle; Ryan K C Yuen; Michael R Hayden Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Jeffrey D Long; Jong-Min Lee; Elizabeth H Aylward; Tammy Gillis; Jayalakshmi Srinidhi Mysore; Kawther Abu Elneel; Michael J Chao; Jane S Paulsen; Marcy E MacDonald; James F Gusella Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Marc Ciosi; Alastair Maxwell; Sarah A Cumming; Davina J Hensman Moss; Asma M Alshammari; Michael D Flower; Alexandra Durr; Blair R Leavitt; Raymund A C Roos; Peter Holmans; Lesley Jones; Douglas R Langbehn; Seung Kwak; Sarah J Tabrizi; Darren G Monckton Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2019-10-10 Impact factor: 8.143