Abstract
The mechanisms of incomplete penetrance of risk modifying impacts of apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε2 and ε4 alleles on Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have not been fully understood. We performed genome-wide analysis of differences in linkage disequilibrium (LD) patterns between 6136 AD-affected and 10555 AD-unaffected subjects from five independent studies to explore whether the association of the APOE ε2 allele (encoded by rs7412 polymorphism) and ε4 allele (encoded by rs429358 polymorphism) with AD was modulated by autosomal polymorphisms. The LD analysis identified 24 (mostly inter-chromosomal) and 57 (primarily intra-chromosomal) autosomal polymorphisms with significant differences in LD with either rs7412 or rs429358, respectively, between AD-affected and AD-unaffected subjects, indicating their potential modulatory roles. Our Cox regression analysis showed that minor alleles of four inter-chromosomal and ten intra-chromosomal polymorphisms exerted significant modulating effects on the ε2- and ε4-associated AD risks, respectively, and identified ε2-independent (rs2884183 polymorphism, 11q22.3) and ε4-independent (rs483082 polymorphism, 19q13.32) associations with AD. Our functional analysis highlighted ε2- and/or ε4-linked processes affecting the lipid and lipoprotein metabolism, and cell junction organization which may contribute to AD pathogenesis. These findings provide insights into the ε2- and ε4-associated mechanisms of AD pathogenesis, underlying their incomplete penetrance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported by Grants from the National Institute on Aging (R01AG047310, R01AG061853, R01AG065477, R01AG070488, and P01AG043352). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study focuses on secondary analysis of data obtained from dbGaP (ADGC, ADSP, CHS, FHS, and LOAD FBS datasets) and NIAGADS (ADSP dataset); and does not involve gathering data from human subjects directly. The data were accessed upon approval by the Duke University Institutional Review Board (IRB) and all analyses were performed following the IRB guidelines.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data used in this study can be obtained from dbGaP (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gap/) and NIAGADS (https://www.niagads.org/adsp/content/home).
