Abstract
Importance: The under-representation of participants with non-European ancestry in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) is a critical issue that has significant implications, including hindering the progress of precision medicine initiatives. This issue is particularly significant in the context of neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs), where current therapeutic approaches have shown limited success. Addressing this under-representation is crucial to harnessing the full potential of genomic medicine in underserved communities and improving outcomes for NDD patients.
Objective Our primary objective was to assess the representation of non-European ancestry participants in genetic discovery efforts related to NDDs. We aimed to quantify the extent of inclusion of diverse ancestry groups in NDD studies and determine the number of associated loci identified in more inclusive studies. Specifically, we sought to highlight the disparities in research efforts and outcomes between studies predominantly involving European ancestry participants and those deliberately targeting non-European or multi-ancestry populations across NDDs.
Evidence Review: We conducted a systematic review utilizing existing GWAS results and publications to assess the inclusion of diverse ancestry groups in neurodegeneration and neurogenetics studies. Our search encompassed studies published up to the end of 2022, with a focus on identifying research that deliberately included non-European or multi-ancestry cohorts. We employed rigorous methods for the inclusion of identified articles and quality assessment.
Findings Our review identified a total of 123 NDD GWAS. Strikingly, 82% of these studies predominantly featured participants of European ancestry. Endeavors specifically targeting non-European or multi-ancestry populations across NDDs identified only 52 risk loci. This contrasts with predominantly European studies, which reported over 90 risk loci for a single disease.
Encouragingly, over 65% of these discoveries occurred in 2020 or later, indicating a recent increase in studies deliberately including non-European cohorts.
Conclusions and relevance Our findings underscore the pressing need for increased diversity in neurodegenerative research. The significant under-representation of non-European ancestry participants in NDD GWAS limits our understanding of the genetic underpinnings of these diseases. To advance the field of neurodegenerative research and develop more effective therapies, it is imperative that future investigations prioritize and harness the genomic diversity present within and across global populations.
Question What is the state of ancestral inclusivity in genetic studies of neurodegenerative diseases?
Findings A systematic review of 123 publications on neurodegenerative diseases shows a focus on European populations, with only 18% of studies including any non-European ancestry data. Among 52 novel loci identified in non-European studies, 28 were from multi-ancestry studies (which included Europeans), 21 from East Asian studies, and 3 from other populations.
Meaning This significant disparity underscores the need for more inclusive research approaches in neurodegenerative diseases, emphasizing multi-ancestry and non-European populations to advance precision medicine and develop treatments effective for diverse populations.
Competing Interest Statement
C.J, K.S.L., L.J., H.L.L. and M.A.N.s participation in this project was part of a competitive contract awarded to DataTecnica LLC by the National Institutes of Health to support open science research. M.A.N. also currently serves on the scientific advisory board for Character Bio Inc. and is a scientific founder at Neuron23 Inc. J.S.Y. serves on the scientific advisory board for the Epstein Family Alzheimer's Research Collaboration.
Funding Statement
This research was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services; project number ZO1 AG000535, as well as the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. We would also like to thank the National Library of Medicine, including Nancy Terry and Alicia Livinski, for their assistance with the review and Covidence. J.S.Y. is supported by NIH-NIA R01AG062588, R01AG057234, P30AG062422, P01AG019724, U19AG079774; NIH-NINDS U54NS123985; NIH-NIDA 75N95022C00031; the Rainwater Charitable Foundation; the Alzheimer's Association; the Global Brain Health Institute; and the Mary Oakley Foundation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
