Founder population-specific weights yield improvements in performance of polygenic risk scores for Alzheimer disease in the Midwestern Amish.

Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia and is estimated to affect 6 million Americans. Risk for AD is multifactorial, including both genetic and environmental risk factors. AD genomic research has generally focused on identification of risk variants. Using this information, polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can be calculated to quantify an individual's relative disease risk due to genetic factors. The Amish are a founder population descended from German and Swiss Anabaptist immigrants. They experienced a genetic bottleneck after arrival in the United States, making their genetic architecture different from the broader European ancestry population. Prior work has demonstrated the lack of transferability of PRSs across populations. Here, we compared the performance of PRSs derived from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of Amish individuals to those derived from a large European ancestry GWAS. Participants were screened for cognitive impairment with further evaluation for AD. Genotype data were imputed after collection via Illumina genotyping arrays. The Amish individuals were split into two groups based on the primary site of recruitment. For each group, GWAS was conducted with account for relatedness and adjustment for covariates. PRSs were then calculated using weights from the other Amish group. PRS models were evaluated with and without covariates. The Amish-derived PRSs distinguished between dementia status better than the European-derived PRS in our Amish populations and demonstrated performance improvements despite a smaller training sample size. This work highlighted considerations for AD PRS usage in populations that cannot be adequately described by basic race/ethnicity or ancestry classifications.

Genetic variants in the SHISA6 gene are associated with delayed cognitive impairment in two family datasets.

INTRODUCTION: Studies of cognitive impairment (CI) in Amish communities have identified sibships containing CI and cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals. We hypothesize that CU individuals may carry protective alleles delaying age at onset (AAO) of CI. METHODS: A total of 1522 individuals screened for CI were genotyped. The outcome studied was AAO for CI individuals or age at last normal exam for CU individuals. Cox mixed-effects models examined association between age and single nucleotide variants (SNVs). RESULTS: Three SNVs were significantly associated (P < 5 × 10-8 ) with AAO on chromosomes 6 (rs14538074; hazard ratio [HR] = 3.35), 9 (rs534551495; HR = 2.82), and 17 (rs146729640; HR = 6.38). The chromosome 17 association was replicated in the independent National Institute on Aging Genetics Initiative for Late-Onset Alzheimer's Disease dataset. DISCUSSION: The replicated genome-wide significant association with AAO on chromosome 17 is located in the SHISA6 gene, which is involved in post-synaptic transmission in the hippocampus and is a biologically plausible candidate gene for Alzheimer's disease.

Cognitive domain harmonization and cocalibration in studies of older adults.

OBJECTIVE: Studies use different instruments to measure cognitirating cognitive tests permit direct comparisons of individuals across studies and pooling data for joint analyses. METHOD: We began our legacy item bank with data from the Adult Changes in Thought study (n = 5,546), the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (n = 3,016), the Rush Memory and Aging Project (n = 2,163), and the Religious on such as the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, the Wechsler Memory Scale, and the Boston Naming Test. CocalibOrders Study (n = 1,456). Our workflow begins with categorizing items administered in each study as indicators of memory, executive functioning, language, visuospatial functioning, or none of these domains. We use confirmatory factor analysis models with data from the most recent visit on the pooled sample across these four studies for cocalibration and derive item parameters for all items. Using these item parameters, we then estimate factor scores along with corresponding standard errors for each domain for each study. We added additional studies to our pipeline as available and focused on thorough consideration of candidate anchor items with identical content and administration methods across studies. RESULTS: Prestatistical harmonization steps such qualitative and quantitative assessment of granular cognitive items and evaluating factor structure are important steps when trying to cocalibrate cognitive scores across studies. We have cocalibrated cognitive data and derived scores for four domains for 76,723 individuals across 10 studies. CONCLUSIONS: We have implemented a large-scale effort to harmonize and cocalibrate cognitive domain scores across multiple studies of cognitive aging. Scores on the same metric facilitate meta-analyses of cognitive outcomes across studies or the joint analysis of individual data across studies. Our systematic approach allows for cocalibration of additional studies as they become available and our growing item bank enables robust investigation of cognition in the context of aging and dementia. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).