| Literature DB >> 35307406 |
Joseph S Reddy1, Jiangli Jin2, Sarah J Lincoln3, Charlotte C G Ho3, Julia E Crook1, Xue Wang1, Kimberly G Malphrus3, Thuy Nguyen3, Nikoleta Tamvaka3, Maria T Greig-Custo4, John A Lucas5, Neill R Graff-Radford5, Nilüfer Ertekin-Taner6, Minerva M Carrasquillo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: African Americans (AA) remain underrepresented in Alzheimer's disease (AD) research, despite the prevalence of AD being double in AA compared to non-Hispanic whites. To address this disparity, our group has established the Florida Consortium for African American Alzheimer's Disease Studies (FCA3DS), focusing on the identification of genetic risk factors and novel plasma biomarkers.Entities:
Keywords: African Americans; Alzheimer's disease; Biomarkers; Gene expression; Plasma; Whole exome sequencing; cf-mRNA; eQTL
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35307406 PMCID: PMC9044003 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103929
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EBioMedicine ISSN: 2352-3964 Impact factor: 11.205
Characteristics of case-control series. Summary characteristics are shown for FCA3DS AD and CU participants included in the DGE, eQTL and AD-risk association analyses. N represents sample size; Female (%) is the percentage of females in each group; Age is the mean and standard deviation of age at plasma draw, and APOE-ε4 (%) is the percentage of APOE-ε4 carriers in each group.
| Analysis | DGE | eQTL | AD-risk association | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diagnosis | AD | CU | AD | CU | AD | CU |
| 151 | 269 | 139 | 225 | 230 | 244 | |
| 69·5 | 76·6 | 67·6 | 74·7 | 70·0 | 74·2 | |
| 77·5 ± 9·2 | 80·1 ± 8·4 | 77·0 ± 9·3 | 79·8 ± 8·7 | 76·4 ± 9·5 | 79·6 ± 9·0 | |
| 65·6 | 34·9 | 66·2 | 36·0 | 63·5 | 36·1 | |
Figure 1Log2-transformed plasma transcript counts for significant DEGs in the 420 FCA3DS AA AD vs. CU participants. (a) Log2-transformed counts are shown for the three genes that showed nominally significant DGE using a mixed linear regression model that includes relevant biological and technical covariates such as age, sex, batch, cartridge, optical density of the plasma sample, and includes sample ID as a random effect to adjust for inter-sample technical variation. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals, the bottom and top of the box are the 25th and 75th percentiles, the line inside the box is the 50th percentile (median), and outliers are shown as dots. (b) Gene β-coefficient and p-value (T-test) from DGE analysis is shown. Only CLU and APP were nominally significant in the APOE-ε4 adjusted model. CLU was significant in both the APOE-ε4 adjusted and unadjusted models after Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.
Significant cis eQTLs that are also associated with AD-risk in the FCA3DS AD case-control series. WES variants within 1Mb of AKAP9 and ABCA7 that remained significant after FDR correction (cis eQTLs) and which had a nominal p-value for association with AD-risk in 420 FCA3DS AD cases and CU controls are shown. rsID: dbSNP ID of the eQTL; Chr: chromosome; Position: hg38; A1: tested allele; A2: reference allele; ß: coefficient of eQTL linear regression model; P: p-value (F-test); Q: FDR q-value. Also shown are the AD-risk association results, including AD-risk odds ratio (OR), p-value (T-test) and MAFs of variants in the 474 FCA3DS AD cases and controls, and ORs and p-values from the Kunkle et al. AD-risk GWAS in NHW. Variant annotation shows the gene proximal to the variant, its exonic function (syn: synonymous; nonsyn: nonsynonymous missense variant) and Regulome score obtained from ANNOVAR.
| Plasma eQTL | AD GWAS - FCA3DS | AD GWAS - NHW | Variant Annotation | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cf-mRNA | rs ID | Chr | Position | A1 | A2 | β | P | Q | MAF | OR | P | MAF | OR | P | Gene | Function | Regulome |
| rs10228334 | 7 | 92084658 | C | T | 1·67 | 4·75E-69 | 1·18E-64 | 0·49 | 1·34 | 3·53E-02 | 0·49 | 1·03 | 5·83E-02 | syn | 5 | ||
| rs57122389 | 7 | 92113034 | C | A | 1·69 | 8·45E-69 | 1·39E-64 | 0·48 | 1·42 | 1·36E-02 | 0·49 | 1·03 | 4·78E-02 | 3’UTR | 6 | ||
| rs6964587 | 7 | 92001306 | G | T | 1·69 | 4·73E-68 | 5·85E-64 | 0·49 | 1·33 | 4·19E-02 | 0·49 | 1·03 | 5·58E-02 | syn | 5 | ||
| rs7793861 | 7 | 92113414 | G | C | -1·60 | 4·57E-58 | 2·83E-54 | 0·49 | 0·76 | 4·69E-02 | 0·48 | 0·97 | 4·70E-02 | 3’UTR | 6 | ||
| rs11459 | 7 | 92112873 | G | A | -1·56 | 4·73E-55 | 2·34E-51 | 0·47 | 0·76 | 4·66E-02 | 0·46 | 0·97 | 4·18E-02 | 3’UTR | 6 | ||
| rs6465348 | 7 | 92113288 | G | A | -1·55 | 1·55E-53 | 6·97E-50 | 0·47 | 0·74 | 2·92E-02 | 0·46 | 0·97 | 3·88E-02 | 3’UTR | 6 | ||
| rs57433727 | 7 | 92400943 | C | T | 0·74 | 4·85E-05 | 2·90E-02 | 0·11 | 1·88 | 3·69E-03 | 0·12 | - | - | 3’UTR | 5 | ||
| rs61740421 | 7 | 92397766 | T | C | 0·73 | 5·00E-05 | 2·91E-02 | 0·11 | 1·87 | 4·20E-03 | 0·12 | - | - | syn | 4 | ||
| rs3752232 | 19 | 1043749 | G | A | -0·51 | 2·10E-07 | 2·74E-04 | 0·25 | 1·65 | 2·99E-03 | 0·26 | 0·93 | 4·87E-02 | nonsyn | 1f | ||
| rs4147910 | 19 | 1047079 | G | A | -0·38 | 8·24E-05 | 4·01E-02 | 0·25 | 1·52 | 1·13E-02 | 0·26 | 1·16 | 9·27E-09 | intronic | 4 | ||
Figure 2Regional association plots of . Locus zoom plots of all variants within 1Mb of the gene were tested for association with gene expression in 364 AD cases and CU controls are shown. The -log10(p-value) of the eQTL association is shown on the y-axis while the chromosomal position of each variant is show on the x-axis. The lead variant, relative to which LD was calculated for all other variants in cis, is shown as a purple diamond. LD values between the lead variant and all other variants is colour coded based on the r2 in a population of African ancestry in Southwest USA.(a) Locus zoom plot for the AKAP9 locus. (b) Locus zoom plot for the ABCA7 locus.
Figure 3ROC curves for . AUC for each model, along with the improvement of models M2 to M5 compared to the base model (M1) are shown. (a)APOE-ε4 adjusted ROC analysis wherein all models (M1 to M5) were adjusted for APOE-ε4 allelic dosage. (b)APOE-ε4 unadjusted models.