Multi-ancestry population attributable risk assessment of common genetic variation in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases
==============================================================================================================================

* Lietsel Jones
* Catalina Cerquera-Cleves
* Artur FS Schuh
* Mary B Makarious
* Hirotaka Iwaki
* Mike A. Nalls
* Alastair J Noyce
* Global Parkinson’s Genetics Program (GP2)
* Cornelis Blauwendraat
* Andrew Singleton
* Ignacio Mata
* Sara Bandres-Ciga

## Abstract

Multiple scientific studies, mostly performed within European populations, have unraveled many of the genetic factors associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD) etiologies, improving our understanding of the molecular pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of these conditions. However, there is increasing evidence that the genetic architecture of these diseases differs across ancestral populations. This raises concerns about the efficacy of therapeutic interventions crafted around genetic targets prevalent only in European ancestry populations. Such interventions neglect potentially distinctive etiological profiles, including Latino, Black/African American, and East Asian populations. In the current study, we explore Population Attributable Risk (PAR) in AD and PD etiologies and assess the proportion of disease attributed to specific genetic factors across diverse populations. Leveraging data from genome-wide association studies across four ancestries, we explore distinct and universal therapeutic targets across diverse populations. Multi-ancestral genetics research is critical to the development of successful therapeutics and treatments for neurodegenerative diseases. By offering insights into genetic disparities, we aim to inform more inclusive and effective therapeutic strategies, advancing personalized healthcare.

Keywords
*   genetic risk
*   population attributable risk
*   genome-wide association
*   diverse ancestries
*   clinical trials
*   target prioritization
*   Alzheimer’s disease
*   Parkinson’s disease

## Introduction

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD) are the most prevalent neurodegenerative disorders globally; their incidence is expected to triple by 2050, particularly in low to middle-income countries 1,2. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have uncovered key genomic regions associated with the risk and pathogenesis of these conditions across diverse ancestries 3–10. These advances are crucial for future therapeutic interventions based on genetic targets, considering that drug mechanisms with genetic support have a 2.6x higher probability of success than those without11. Genetic evidence has proven particularly valuable in areas where existing treatments fail to modify disease progression, providing a solid foundation for developing new transformative drugs11. However, the majority of GWAS on neurodegenerative diseases predominantly feature participants of European ancestry, underrepresenting the ancestral diversity of non-European populations12. There is an urgent need for improved drug development target selection and prioritization methods that consider the different genetic architecture across all ancestries.

Population Attributable Risk (PAR) is a statistical measure used in epidemiology to estimate the proportion of disease cases that would decrease if a risk factor were removed from a population 13. PAR estimates how much disease occurrence is influenced by particular risk factors, offering insights into disease pathophysiology and therapeutic strategies to mitigate these risks. In genetics, PAR represents a comparative means for comparing risk across genetic loci relative to the odds ratio and frequency of the most representative variant(s) in a given region. PAR serves to prioritize genetic targets according to their impact on a specific population14. By understanding PAR in the genetic context of AD and PD, healthcare strategies and policies can be tailored to the specific needs of diverse population groups.

In this study, we aimed to comprehensively explore PAR estimates for common genetic risk factors associated with AD and PD through GWAS across various populations. Our goal was to uncover disparities in genetic predispositions and their implications for precision therapeutic development and applicability across genetic ancestry groups in order to investigate distinct and universal therapeutic targets. Identifying these disparities may help the field to develop more equitable and effective therapies, ensuring that therapeutic interventions are tailored to the genetic makeup of diverse populations.

## Methods

### Data sources

Our reference datasets consisted of summary statistics from previously published population-specific GWAS conducted in AD and PD across diverse genetically defined ancestries 3–10. A detailed summary of these data can be found in Table S1. To prevent the possible weakening of associations or biased analyses, we did not include summary statistics using proxy cases (those from biobanks without a clinically defined case status). The variants in this study are independent risk alleles and did not include those in linkage disequilibrium. All scripts for analyses are publicly available on GitHub (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.13774456; [https://github.com/GP2code/PAR-ADPD/](https://github.com/GP2code/PAR-ADPD/)).

### Population Attributable Risk calculations

In this context, PAR is a measure of the risk reduction achieved by hypothetically removing a risk allele from the risk-associated locus14. It is a combination of the magnitude of risk association and the frequency of the risk allele. Before conducting PAR calculations, we filtered each dataset by p < 0.05 for nominally significantly associated variants. This refined filter enabled us to enhance confidence in the directionality of effect estimates for risk alleles and minimize potential sources of bias. We filtered summary statistics based on overlap with the most significant disease variants per locus from recent multi-ancestry GWAS models8. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed from beta estimates for each ancestry group contributing to the GWAS meta-analysis. We standardized beta estimates to refer to the same effect allele across different ancestries. These odds ratios were essential for assessing the strength and direction of the association between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and disease status. The risk allele frequency (RAF) was calculated across ancestries for SNPs representing significant loci. This frequency was utilized in further calculations of the PAR for each locus in the respective populations.

We calculated PAR using the formula: ![Formula][1]</img>  Where p represents the RAF and OR is the calculated odds ratio for each risk allele (OR > 1, beta > 0), both extracted from summary statistics under study. RAF values were plotted against their corresponding ORs for each ancestry group.

## Results

A total of 55 AD and 90 PD variants from GWAS meta-analyses3–10 were evaluated a population-attributable risk factors for European, Black/African American, Latino, and East Asian ancestries (Table S2, Table S3). Table S4 highlights the variants with the highest PAR estimates for both AD and PD in each population.

### Cross-ancestry population attributable risk comparison reveals the universally applicable genetic targets for Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease

For AD, two loci had the highest PAR across multiple ancestries. The *TSPAN14* locus represented by the rs7922621 variant had one of the top signals in both European and Black/African American ancestries. The rs9787874 variant at the *PICALM* locus also had one of the top PAR estimates in individuals of Latino, East Asian, Black/African American, and European ancestry (Figure 1)(Table S4).

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F1)

Figure 1. 
Highest population attributable risk (PAR) for Alzheimer’s disease-related variants in Black/African American, East Asian, European, and Latino populations, respectively. The x-axis represents the risk allele frequency, and the y-axis represents the odds ratio, or effect size. The nearest gene for each variant is indicated by color with the size of each dot being corresponding to the PAR value.

In relation to PD, different variants exhibited nominal significance in cross-ancestry PAR estimates. *SNCA* locus represented by the rs356182 variant was identified among top PAR signals for European, African/Admixed, and Latino populations. Top hits in the *MAPT* locus were identified among Latinos and Europeans, while higher PAR estimates in the *SNCA* locus were found among individuals of Latino, European, African/African Admixed, and East Asian descent. Moreover, the rs10513789 variant at the *MCCC1* locus was found among the top signals in the African/African Admixed, European, and East Asian ancestry populations; and *VPS13C* rs2251086 was among the highest PAR estimates in all populations (Figure 2)(Table S4).

![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F2)

Figure 2. 
Highest population attributable risk (PAR) for Parkinson’s disease-related variants in African/African Admixed, East Asian, European, and Latino populations, respectively. The x-axis represents the risk allele frequency, and the y-axis represents the odds ratio, or effect size. The nearest gene for each variant is indicated by color with the size of each dot being corresponding to the PAR value.

### APOE, GBA1, and LRRK2 display varying population-attributable risks for AD and PD across diverse ancestries

The *APOE* allelic variants (rs7412 and rs429358), widely recognized as the major genetic risk factors for AD, consistently demonstrated higher PAR estimates across all ancestries than other genetic loci (Figure 3). Notably, individuals of Black/African American and East Asian descent exhibited the highest PAR values for both variants compared to other ancestries, whereas those of European ancestry showed lower values for the rs1081105 variant (a proxy for rs429358) than other ancestries. In addition, individuals of Latino ancestry displayed the lowest PAR for *APOE* compared to other ancestries, with rs429358 emerging as the highest *APOE* variant in this group, and rs7412 not being present in the summary statistics under study (Table S4).

![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/09/24/2024.09.23.24314240/F3)

Figure 3. 
Population attributable risk (PAR) comparison among assessed populations for known disease variants: APOE, GBA1, and LRRK2, respectively. The x-axis represents the risk allele frequency, and the y-axis represents the odds ratio, or effect size.

On the other hand, *GBA1* was identified as one of the top PAR signals in the African/African Admixed ancestry, primarily driven by the population-specific variant *GBA1* rs3115534. In contrast, other coding variants demonstrated varying PAR estimates across ancestries (Table S5). PAR estimates for *GBA1* rs76763715 tagging p.N370S were lower in Europeans and Latinos, as well as the estimates for the intronic *GBA1* rs146532106 variant in the East Asian population (Figure 3)(Table S3). Low PAR estimates were observed for the *LRRK2* variant rs76904798 in all ancestries assessed.

## Discussion

This study aimed to dissect the impact of cross-ancestral risk alleles for AD and PD at a population scale by assessing and comparing PAR for variants from GWAS meta-analyses across diverse ancestries, including European, African, East Asian, and Latino. While PAR fractions have previously been studied for modifiable risk factors in neurodegenerative diseases15,16, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to estimate the PAR for AD/PD-related genetic variation across ancestries. By leveraging summary statistics from multi-ancestry GWAS, we assessed the genetic variants with the greatest influence on risk of AD/PD based on PAR estimations in a global setting.

In AD, East Asian and European ancestry populations exhibited the highest PAR estimates for *APOE* compared to other populations, underscoring the well-established risk associated with *APOE4* in these groups8. In contrast, *APOE* risk varies considerably among Latino and Black/African American populations. Recent studies have provided insights into the differential risk associated with *APOE4* risk alleles among populations of African ancestry. African-descent populations carrying the *APOE4* allele have been found to have a lower AD risk than other populations with this same allele, suggesting that the African ancestral genetic background surrounding the *APOE* gene is associated with a lower odds ratio for risk variants17. A recent study identified a protective locus for the *APOE4* allele in African-descent populations, which significantly lowers the risk for AD in *APOE4* carriers, in which the magnitude of the effect decreased from 7.2 to 2.1 for African carriers of the *APOE4* allele carrying this protective locus located 2MB from *APOE*. The protective haplotype has a frequency of 12% in African ancestry while being notably rare in Europeans, with a frequency of only 0.003%18.

Of note, *TRANK1*, a novel locus unraveled by a recent multi-ancestry meta-analysis in AD8, emerged as one of the top estimated PAR loci in the Black/African American ancestry in our PAR assessment. *TRANK1* seems to play an important role in African descent populations, as previously identified through a gene-based analysis in a GWAS conducted on African Americans10. Interestingly, this locus has also been highlighted in GWAS for schizophrenia and bipolar disorders, with the latter being well known to increase the risk of AD. Other important cross-ancestral AD loci that emerged in our study included *TSPAN14* for European and Black/African American ancestries, and *PICALM* in individuals of European, Latino, Black/African American, and East Asian descent. Both of these genes have been implicated in microglia activation, highlighting this pathway as a potential therapeutic target18.

In PD, our study identified *SNCA, MCCC1, MAPT*, and *VPS13C* as the loci displaying the highest PAR. Three of these loci are multi-signal, with different and significant impacts across multiple ancestries based on PAR estimates. In contrast, the rs10748818 variant at the *GBF1* locus was identified as the locus with the highest estimated PAR for the African/African Admixed population. This gene seems to modulate intracellular protein traffic, and variants in it have also been associated with PD in Chinese populations19. *HLA-DRB5* rs112485576 had the highest estimated PAR for the East Asian population. Variants in this locus have also been previously associated with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, suggesting a potential overlapping genetic nexus with gut disturbances in PD20. Of note, the PAR estimates for *GBA1* differ across populations, with the population-specific *GBA1* rs3115534 variant having one of the highest PAR estimates for the African/African Admixed ancestry, while other well-known coding *GBA1* variants showed varying PAR estimates depending on the population. On the other hand, the lower observed PAR estimates for the *LRRK2* p.G2019S variant across ancestries are expected since this variant is less common compared to the PD GWAS loci resulting in a smaller population attributable influence9. These results highlight the role of key cross-ancestral signals and suggest the potential of targeted therapies in these populations, emphasizing the importance of designing therapeutic approaches tailored to the unique genetic profiles of each ancestry.

This study prioritized potential genetic targets across diverse ancestries by estimating the PAR for genetic loci associated with AD and PD risk. Identifying genetic risk variants with consistent PARs across multiple ancestries highlights the promise of developing therapeutics with broader effectiveness, surpassing the constraints of population-specific treatments. Some limitations in this study include differences in sample sizes across populations assessed which may influence PAR estimates. Future refinement of PAR for the purposes of highlighting genetic targets can be achieved by utilizing subpopulation summary statistics. Further, genotyping arrays have been primarily Eurocentric leading to the potential of missed risk signals in underrepresented populations. PAR estimates may be improved with the use of whole genome sequencing data in future genome-wide association studies. Consideration of genetic and other risk factors, such as environmental, in the use of PAR could prove useful in future applications. Overall, our results indicate that concentrating on specific genetic loci could amplify the efficacy of targeted medical interventions, ultimately serving a wider population.

## Supporting information

Supplementary Tables [[supplements/314240_file03.xlsx]](pending:yes)

## Data Availability

This project was supported by the Global Parkinson's Genetics Program (GP2). Data (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.13755496, release 8) used in the preparation of this article were obtained from GP2. GP2 is funded by the Aligning Science Across Parkinson's (ASAP) initiative and implemented by The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research (https://gp2.org). For a complete list of GP2 members see https://gp2.org. All scripts for analyses are publicly available on GitHub (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.13774456; https://github.com/GP2code/PAR-ADPD/).

[https://github.com/GP2code/PAR-ADPD/](https://github.com/GP2code/PAR-ADPD/) 

## Acknowledgments

We thank all the participants who contributed to this study. This work was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the NIH, the US Department of Health and Human Services (project number ZIAAG000534), the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), and NHGRI. We thank Paige Brown Jarreau for her meticulous editing of this manuscript.

This project was supported by the Global Parkinson’s Genetics Program (GP2). Data (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.13755496, release 8) used in the preparation of this article were obtained from GP2. GP2 is funded by the Aligning Science Across Parkinson’s (ASAP) initiative and implemented by The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research ([https://gp2.org](https://gp2.org)). For a complete list of GP2 members see [https://gp2.org](https://gp2.org).

## Footnotes

*   **Funding:** 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 ZIAAG000534, as well as the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (IFM received R01NS132437-01A1). C.C.C is funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Vanier Scholarship.

*   **Conflicts of interest:** L.J., H.I, M.B.M, 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 at Clover Therapeutics and is an advisor and scientific founder at Neuron23 Inc.

*   **License:** CC-BY

*   Received September 23, 2024.
*   Revision received September 23, 2024.
*   Accepted September 24, 2024.


*   © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.GBD 2016 Dementia Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(1):88–106.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30403-4&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 

2.  2.GBD 2016 Parkinson’s Disease Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of Parkinson’s disease, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(11):939–953.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30295-3&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30287051&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 

3.  3.Foo JN, Tan LC, Irwan ID, et al. Genome-wide association study of Parkinson’s disease in East Asians. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2017;26(1):226–232.
    
    

4.  4.Rizig M, Bandres-Ciga S, Makarious MB, et al. Identification of genetic risk loci and causal insights associated with Parkinson’s disease in African and African admixed populations: a genome-wide association study. Lancet Neurol. 2023;22(11):1015–1025.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(23)00283-1&link_type=DOI) 

5.  5.Loesch DP, Horimoto ARVR, Heilbron K, et al. Characterizing the Genetic Architecture of Parkinson’s Disease in Latinos [Internet]. Ann. Neurol. 2021;Available from: doi:10.1002/ana.26153
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/ana.26153&link_type=DOI) 

6.  6.Shigemizu D, Mitsumori R, Akiyama S, et al. Ethnic and trans-ethnic genome-wide association studies identify new loci influencing Japanese Alzheimer’s disease risk. Transl. Psychiatry 2021;11(1):151.
    
    

7.  7.Bellenguez C, Küçükali F, Jansen IE, et al. New insights into the genetic etiology of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Nat. Genet. 2022;54(4):412–436.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 

8.  8.Lake J, Warly Solsberg C, Kim JJ, et al. Multi-ancestry meta-analysis and fine-mapping in Alzheimer’s disease. Mol. Psychiatry 2023;28(7):3121–3132.
    
    

9.  9.Nalls MA, Blauwendraat C, Vallerga CL, et al. Identification of novel risk loci, causal insights, and heritable risk for Parkinson’s disease: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(12):1091–1102.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30320-5&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 

10. 10.Kunkle BW, Schmidt M, Klein H-U, et al. Novel Alzheimer Disease Risk Loci and Pathways in African American Individuals Using the African Genome Resources Panel: A Meta-analysis. JAMA Neurol. 2021;78(1):102–113.
    
    

11. 11.Minikel EV, Painter JL, Dong CC, Nelson MR. Refining the impact of genetic evidence on clinical success [Internet]. Nature 2024;Available from: doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07316-0
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41586-024-07316-0&link_type=DOI) 

12. 12.Jonson C, Levine KS, Lake J, et al. Assessing the lack of diversity in genetics research across neurodegenerative diseases: a systematic review of the GWAS Catalog and literature [Internet]. medRxiv 2024;Available from: doi:10.1101/2024.01.08.24301007
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyNC4wMS4wOC4yNDMwMTAwN3YxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDkvMjQvMjAyNC4wOS4yMy4yNDMxNDI0MC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

13. 13.Wang T, Hosgood HD, Lan Q, Xue X. The Relationship Between Population Attributable Fraction and Heritability in Genetic Studies. Front. Genet. 2018;9:352.
    
    

14. 14.International Parkinson Disease Genomics Consortium, Nalls MA, Plagnol V, et al. Imputation of sequence variants for identification of genetic risks for Parkinson’s disease: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies. Lancet 2011;377(9766):641–649.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62345-8&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21292315&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000287776600033&link_type=ISI) 

15. 15.Barnes DE, Yaffe K. The projected effect of risk factor reduction on Alzheimer’s disease prevalence. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10(9):819–828.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70072-2&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21775213&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F09%2F24%2F2024.09.23.24314240.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000294532300010&link_type=ISI) 

16. 16.Bothongo PLK, Jitlal M, Parry E, et al. Dementia risk in a diverse population: A single-region nested case-control study in the East End of London. Lancet Reg Health Eur 2022;15:100321.
    
    

17. 17.Rajabli F, Beecham GW, Hendrie HC, et al. A locus at 19q13.31 significantly reduces the ApoE ε4 risk for Alzheimer’s Disease in African Ancestry. PLoS Genet. 2022;18(7):e1009977.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/JOURNAL.PGEN.1009977&link_type=DOI) 

18. 18.Yang X, Wen J, Yang H, et al. Functional characterization of Alzheimer’s disease genetic variants in microglia. Nat. Genet. 2023;55(10):1735–1744.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41588-023-01506-8&link_type=DOI) 

19. 19.Zhao A, Li Y, Niu M, et al. SNPs in SNCA, MCCC1, DLG2, GBF1 and MBNL2 are associated with Parkinson’s disease in southern Chinese population. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2020;24(15):8744–8752.
    
    

20. 20.Kars, M.E., Wu, Y., Stenson, P.D. et al. The landscape of rare genetic variation associated with inflammatory bowel disease and Parkinson’s disease comorbidity. Genome Med 16, 66 (2024). doi:10.1186/s13073-024-01335-2
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13073-024-01335-2&link_type=DOI)

 [1]: /embed/graphic-1.gif