Sara Bandres-Ciga1,2, Sara Saez-Atienzar3, Luis Bonet-Ponce4, Kimberley Billingsley1,5,6, Dan Vitale7, Cornelis Blauwendraat1, Jesse Raphael Gibbs7, Lasse Pihlstrøm8, Ziv Gan-Or9,10, Mark R Cookson4, Mike A Nalls1,11, Andrew B Singleton1. 1. Molecular Genetics Section, Laboratory of Neurogenetics, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 2. Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada (ibs.GRANADA), Granada, Spain. 3. Transgenics Section, Laboratory of Neurogenetics, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 4. Cell Biology and Gene Expression Section, Laboratory of Neurogenetics, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 5. Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom. 6. Department of Pathophysiology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. 7. Computational Biology Group, Laboratory of Neurogenetics, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 8. Department of Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 9. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada. 10. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montréal, Quebec, Canada. 11. Data Tecnica International, Glen Echo, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: PD is a complex polygenic disorder. In recent years, several genes from the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway have been suggested to contribute to disease etiology. However, a systematic analysis of pathway-specific genetic risk factors is yet to be performed. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively study the role of the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway in the risk of PD. METHODS: Linkage disequilibrium score regression was used to estimate PD heritability explained by 252 genes involved in the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway including genome-wide association studies data from 18,869 cases and 22,452 controls. We used pathway-specific single-nucleotide polymorphisms to construct a polygenic risk score reflecting the cumulative risk of common variants. To prioritize genes for follow-up functional studies, summary-data based Mendelian randomization analyses were applied to explore possible functional genomic associations with expression or methylation quantitative trait loci. RESULTS: The heritability estimate attributed to endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway was 3.58% (standard error = 1.17). Excluding previously nominated PD endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway genes, the missing heritability was 2.21% (standard error = 0.42). Random heritability simulations were estimated to be 1.44% (standard deviation = 0.54), indicating that the unbiased total heritability explained by the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway was 2.14%. Polygenic risk score based on endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway showed a 1.25 times increase of PD risk per standard deviation of genetic risk. Finally, Mendelian randomization identified 11 endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway genes showing functional consequence associated to PD risk. CONCLUSIONS: We provide compelling genetic evidence that the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway plays a relevant role in disease etiology. Further research on this pathway is warranted given that critical effort should be made to identify potential avenues within this biological process suitable for therapeutic interventions.
BACKGROUND: PD is a complex polygenic disorder. In recent years, several genes from the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway have been suggested to contribute to disease etiology. However, a systematic analysis of pathway-specific genetic risk factors is yet to be performed. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively study the role of the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway in the risk of PD. METHODS: Linkage disequilibrium score regression was used to estimate PD heritability explained by 252 genes involved in the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway including genome-wide association studies data from 18,869 cases and 22,452 controls. We used pathway-specific single-nucleotide polymorphisms to construct a polygenic risk score reflecting the cumulative risk of common variants. To prioritize genes for follow-up functional studies, summary-data based Mendelian randomization analyses were applied to explore possible functional genomic associations with expression or methylation quantitative trait loci. RESULTS: The heritability estimate attributed to endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway was 3.58% (standard error = 1.17). Excluding previously nominated PD endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway genes, the missing heritability was 2.21% (standard error = 0.42). Random heritability simulations were estimated to be 1.44% (standard deviation = 0.54), indicating that the unbiased total heritability explained by the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway was 2.14%. Polygenic risk score based on endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway showed a 1.25 times increase of PD risk per standard deviation of genetic risk. Finally, Mendelian randomization identified 11 endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway genes showing functional consequence associated to PD risk. CONCLUSIONS: We provide compelling genetic evidence that the endocytic membrane-trafficking pathway plays a relevant role in disease etiology. Further research on this pathway is warranted given that critical effort should be made to identify potential avenues within this biological process suitable for therapeutic interventions.
Authors: Sara Bandrés-Ciga; Timothy Ryan Price; Francisco Javier Barrero; Francisco Escamilla-Sevilla; Javier Pelegrina; Sampath Arepalli; Dena Hernández; Blanca Gutiérrez; Jorge Cervilla; Margarita Rivera; Alberto Rivera; Jing-Hui Ding; Francisco Vives; Michael Nalls; Andrew Singleton; Raquel Durán Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2016-06-11 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Zhihong Zhu; Futao Zhang; Han Hu; Andrew Bakshi; Matthew R Robinson; Joseph E Powell; Grant W Montgomery; Michael E Goddard; Naomi R Wray; Peter M Visscher; Jian Yang Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2016-03-28 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Mike A Nalls; Nathan Pankratz; Christina M Lill; Chuong B Do; Dena G Hernandez; Mohamad Saad; Anita L DeStefano; Eleanna Kara; Jose Bras; Manu Sharma; Claudia Schulte; Margaux F Keller; Sampath Arepalli; Christopher Letson; Connor Edsall; Hreinn Stefansson; Xinmin Liu; Hannah Pliner; Joseph H Lee; Rong Cheng; M Arfan Ikram; John P A Ioannidis; Georgios M Hadjigeorgiou; Joshua C Bis; Maria Martinez; Joel S Perlmutter; Alison Goate; Karen Marder; Brian Fiske; Margaret Sutherland; Georgia Xiromerisiou; Richard H Myers; Lorraine N Clark; Kari Stefansson; John A Hardy; Peter Heutink; Honglei Chen; Nicholas W Wood; Henry Houlden; Haydeh Payami; Alexis Brice; William K Scott; Thomas Gasser; Lars Bertram; Nicholas Eriksson; Tatiana Foroud; Andrew B Singleton Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2014-07-27 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: L M Reus; X Shen; J Gibson; E Wigmore; L Ligthart; M J Adams; G Davies; S R Cox; S P Hagenaars; M E Bastin; I J Deary; H C Whalley; A M McIntosh Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Bernard Ng; Charles C White; Hans-Ulrich Klein; Solveig K Sieberts; Cristin McCabe; Ellis Patrick; Jishu Xu; Lei Yu; Chris Gaiteri; David A Bennett; Sara Mostafavi; Philip L De Jager Journal: Nat Neurosci Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 24.884
Authors: Stephanie J Guiney; Paul A Adlard; Peng Lei; Celeste H Mawal; Ashley I Bush; David I Finkelstein; Scott Ayton Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Yvette C Wong; Kelvin Luk; Kerry Purtell; Samuel Burke Nanni; A Jon Stoessl; Louis-Eric Trudeau; Zhenyu Yue; Dimitri Krainc; Wolfgang Oertel; Jose A Obeso; Laura A Volpicelli-Daley Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Mike A Nalls; Cornelis Blauwendraat; Costanza L Vallerga; Karl Heilbron; Sara Bandres-Ciga; Diana Chang; Manuela Tan; Demis A Kia; Alastair J Noyce; Angli Xue; Jose Bras; Emily Young; Rainer von Coelln; Javier Simón-Sánchez; Claudia Schulte; Manu Sharma; Lynne Krohn; Lasse Pihlstrøm; Ari Siitonen; Hirotaka Iwaki; Hampton Leonard; Faraz Faghri; J Raphael Gibbs; Dena G Hernandez; Sonja W Scholz; Juan A Botia; Maria Martinez; Jean-Christophe Corvol; Suzanne Lesage; Joseph Jankovic; Lisa M Shulman; Margaret Sutherland; Pentti Tienari; Kari Majamaa; Mathias Toft; Ole A Andreassen; Tushar Bangale; Alexis Brice; Jian Yang; Ziv Gan-Or; Thomas Gasser; Peter Heutink; Joshua M Shulman; Nicholas W Wood; David A Hinds; John A Hardy; Huw R Morris; Jacob Gratten; Peter M Visscher; Robert R Graham; Andrew B Singleton Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Stephanie J Guiney; Paul A Adlard; Peng Lei; Celeste H Mawal; Ashley I Bush; David I Finkelstein; Scott Ayton Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 5.157