| Literature DB >> 35930268 |
Andrea R Waksmunski1,2,3, Kristy Miskimen3, Yeunjoo E Song3, Michelle Grunin2,3, Renee Laux3, Denise Fuzzell3, Sarada Fuzzell3, Larry D Adams4, Laura Caywood4, Michael Prough4, Dwight Stambolian5, William K Scott4, Margaret A Pericak-Vance4, Jonathan L Haines1,2,3.
Abstract
Purpose: Genetic variants in the complement factor H gene (CFH) have been consistently implicated in age-related macular degeneration (AMD) risk. However, their functional effects are not fully characterized. We previously identified a rare, AMD-associated variant in CFH (P503A, rs570523689) in 19 Amish individuals, but its functional consequences were not investigated.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35930268 PMCID: PMC9363678 DOI: 10.1167/iovs.63.9.8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci ISSN: 0146-0404 Impact factor: 4.925
Figure 1.All-connecting path pedigree for the 58 Amish individuals with the risk allele for The ancestry of the 58 carriers can be traced to 12 common ancestors (6 married couples). The pedigree was drawn using genealogy information from the AGDB and the Pedigraph software tool. Circles represent women, and squares represent men. Carriers are highlighted in orange.
Association Test Results for CFH P503A and AMD
| Full Dataset | Newly Ascertained | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | Dataset Only ( | ||||
| Kinship Matrix | Covariate Adjustments | Effect Estimate |
| Effect Estimate |
|
|
| None | 0.95 | 0.009 | −0.034 | 0.94 |
| Age + sex | 0.68 | 0.08 | 0.46 | 0.42 | |
| Age + sex + location | 0.57 | 0.14 | 0.26 | 0.64 | |
|
| None | 0.99 | 0.004 | −0.055 | 0.90 |
| Age + sex | 0.67 | 0.06 | 0.44 | 0.42 | |
| Age + sex + location | 0.53 | 0.15 | 0.18 | 0.72 | |
Effect estimates (betas) and P values were calculated using a generalized linear mixed model accounting for kinship information from kinship matrices comprised of the (i) full ACP and (ii) immediate familial relationships of the genotyped individuals alone (i.e. sibships) in the “full dataset,” which included 224 AMD-affected (93 Ohio, 38 Indiana, and 93 Pennsylvania) and 841 unaffected (250 Ohio, 220 Indiana, and 371 Pennsylvania) Amish individuals. Among these 1065 individuals, 59 individuals (12 AMD-affected carriers, 6 unaffected carriers, 15 AMD-affected noncarriers, and 26 unaffected noncarriers) were also part of the CFH P503A discovery analyses. Therefore, we also performed association analyses in the newly ascertained dataset alone, which included 197 AMD-affected (73 Ohio, 31 Indiana, and 93 Pennsylvania) and 809 unaffected (222 Ohio, 216 Indiana, and 371 Pennsylvania) Amish individuals. For both datasets, we considered unadjusted models, models adjusting for age at examination and sex, and models adjusting for age at examination, sex, and location of ascertainment (Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania).
Figure 2.Age at AMD diagnosis for carriers and non-carriers of the risk allele for The AMD statuses of 826 Amish individuals were evaluated, including 31 risk allele carriers (7 with AMD and 24 without AMD) and 795 noncarriers (154 with AMD and 641 without AMD) from the Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania Amish populations. Blue represents the risk allele carriers (Genotyped = CG), and red represents the noncarriers (Genotyped = CC). The y-axis depicts the proportion of carriers and noncarriers that were considered unaffected at their eye examination. The x-axis depicts the ages at which individuals received their first diagnosis of AMD based on their eye examination.
Figure 3.Relative expression of We measured expression of the following transcripts: (A) CFH-206 and CFH-202; (B) CFH-201, CFH-206, and CFH-202; (C) CFH-202; (D) CFH-203. Four samples were removed as outliers because their relative CFH expression levels fell outside 1.5 times the IQR in at least one group of at least one of the assays we performed. This included one affected carrier, two unaffected carriers, and one unaffected noncarrier. Sample sizes for each group: n = 18 for carrier; n = 18 for noncarrier; n = 11 for AMD; and n = 25 for non-AMD. Statistical differences among relative CFH transcript expression levels from carriers and noncarriers with and without AMD were evaluated using two-sided t-tests assuming unequal variance. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean for each group. Assay results shown in panels A and B were normalized to ACTB, and assay results shown in panels C and D were normalized to TBP.
Figure 4.CFH protein expression in plasma. (A) Representative Western blot measuring relative CFH protein expression in plasma from carriers (sample from the homozygous risk allele carrier is noted with an asterisk (*); all other carriers are heterozygous for the risk allele) and noncarriers with differing AMD diagnoses. Plasma from normal blood donors and liver CFH lysate were used as controls in our experiments. (B) Comparison of CFH protein expression in plasma from carriers of the risk allele (n = 38) versus noncarriers of the risk allele (n = 43) measured by 14 Western blots. (C) Comparison of CFH protein expression in plasma from individuals affected by AMD (n = 39) versus unaffected individuals (n = 42) measured by 14 Western blots. (D) Comparison of CFH protein expression in plasma from carriers of the risk allele (n = 44) versus noncarriers of the risk allele (n = 52) measured by five ELISA experiments. (E) Comparison of CFH protein expression in plasma from individuals affected by AMD (n = 40) versus unaffected individuals (n = 56) measured by five ELISA experiments. The P values for all comparisons in panels B to E were calculated using two-sided t-tests assuming unequal variance. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean for each group.
Figure 5.CRP protein expression in plasma. (A) Representative Western blot measuring relative CRP expression in plasma from heterozygous carriers and noncarriers with differing AMD diagnoses. Liver CRP lysate was used as a control in our experiments. (B) Comparison of CRP expression in plasma from carriers of the risk allele (n = 37) versus noncarriers of the risk allele (n = 41) measured by 10 Western blots. (C) Comparison of CRP expression in plasma from individuals affected by AMD (n = 37) versus unaffected individuals (n = 41) measured by 10 Western blots. The P values for all comparisons in panels B and C were calculated using two-sided t-tests assuming unequal variance. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean for each group.
Figure 6.Visualization of protein models containing the amino acid substitution for Models were visualized with Chimera software. (A) SCR8 with P503 and interacting residues. Points of contact are depicted in red. (B) SCR8 with A503 and interacting residues. Points of contact are depicted in red. (C) Superposition of P503 (blue residue) and A503 (orange residue) protein models and neighboring contacts. Residues colored in green maintained the same contacts in the P503 and A503 structures. Red residues lost contact with A503 that interacted with P503. The yellow residue had reduced contacts with A503 compared to P503.