Recruitment of trimeric eIF2 by phosphatase non-catalytic subunit PPP1R15B.

Regulated protein phosphorylation controls most cellular processes. The protein phosphatase PP1 is the catalytic subunit of many holoenzymes that dephosphorylate serine/threonine residues. How these enzymes recruit their substrates is largely unknown. Here, we integrated diverse approaches to elucidate how the PP1 non-catalytic subunit PPP1R15B (R15B) captures its full trimeric eIF2 substrate. We found that the substrate-recruitment module of R15B is largely disordered with three short helical elements, H1, H2, and H3. H1 and H2 form a clamp that grasps the substrate in a region remote from the phosphorylated residue. A homozygous N423D variant, adjacent to H1, reducing substrate binding and dephosphorylation was discovered in a rare syndrome with microcephaly, developmental delay, and intellectual disability. These findings explain how R15B captures its 125 kDa substrate by binding the far end of the complex relative to the phosphosite to present it for dephosphorylation by PP1, a paradigm of broad relevance.

Diagnostic utility and reporting recommendations for clinical DNA methylation episignature testing in genetically undiagnosed rare diseases.

PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the diagnostic utility and provide reporting recommendations for clinical DNA methylation episignature testing based on the cohort of patients tested through the EpiSign Clinical Testing Network. METHODS: The EpiSign assay utilized unsupervised clustering techniques and a support vector machine-based classification algorithm to compare each patient's genome-wide DNA methylation profile with the EpiSign Knowledge Database, yielding the result that was reported. An international working group, representing distinct EpiSign Clinical Testing Network health jurisdictions, collaborated to establish recommendations for interpretation and reporting of episignature testing. RESULTS: Among 2399 cases analyzed, 1667 cases underwent a comprehensive screen of validated episignatures, imprinting, and promoter regions, resulting in 18.7% (312/1667) positive reports. The remaining 732 referrals underwent targeted episignature analysis for assessment of sequence or copy-number variants (CNVs) of uncertain significance or for assessment of clinical diagnoses without confirmed molecular findings, and 32.4% (237/732) were positive. Cases with detailed clinical information were highlighted to describe various utility scenarios for episignature testing. CONCLUSION: Clinical DNA methylation testing including episignatures, imprinting, and promoter analysis provided by an integrated network of clinical laboratories enables test standardization and demonstrates significant diagnostic yield and clinical utility beyond DNA sequence analysis in rare diseases.

Biallelic variants in TMEM222 cause a new autosomal recessive neurodevelopmental disorder.

PURPOSE: To elucidate the novel molecular cause in families with a new autosomal recessive neurodevelopmental disorder. METHODS: A combination of exome sequencing and gene matching tools was used to identify pathogenic variants in 17 individuals. Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and subcellular localization studies were used to characterize gene expression profile and localization. RESULTS: Biallelic variants in the TMEM222 gene were identified in 17 individuals from nine unrelated families, presenting with intellectual disability and variable other features, such as aggressive behavior, shy character, body tremors, decreased muscle mass in the lower extremities, and mild hypotonia. We found relatively high TMEM222 expression levels in the human brain, especially in the parietal and occipital cortex. Additionally, subcellular localization analysis in human neurons derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) revealed that TMEM222 localizes to early endosomes in the synapses of mature iPSC-derived neurons. CONCLUSION: Our findings support a role for TMEM222 in brain development and function and adds variants in the gene TMEM222 as a novel underlying cause of an autosomal recessive neurodevelopmental disorder.

Correction: Putting genome-wide sequencing in neonates into perspective.

The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of the author Pleuntje J. van der Sluijs, which was incorrectly given as Eline (P. J.) van der Sluijs. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.

Whole-Genome Sequencing Analysis Reveals New Susceptibility Loci and Structural Variants Associated with Progressive Supranuclear Palsy.

Background: Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a rare neurodegenerative disease characterized by the accumulation of aggregated tau proteins in astrocytes, neurons, and oligodendrocytes. Previous genome-wide association studies for PSP were based on genotype array, therefore, were inadequate for the analysis of rare variants as well as larger mutations, such as small insertions/deletions (indels) and structural variants (SVs). Method: In this study, we performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) and conducted association analysis for single nucleotide variants (SNVs), indels, and SVs, in a cohort of 1,718 cases and 2,944 controls of European ancestry. Of the 1,718 PSP individuals, 1,441 were autopsy-confirmed and 277 were clinically diagnosed. Results: Our analysis of common SNVs and indels confirmed known genetic loci at MAPT, MOBP, STX6, SLCO1A2, DUSP10, and SP1, and further uncovered novel signals in APOE, FCHO1/MAP1S, KIF13A, TRIM24, TNXB, and ELOVL1. Notably, in contrast to Alzheimer's disease (AD), we observed the APOE ε2 allele to be the risk allele in PSP. Analysis of rare SNVs and indels identified significant association in ZNF592 and further gene network analysis identified a module of neuronal genes dysregulated in PSP. Moreover, seven common SVs associated with PSP were observed in the H1/H2 haplotype region (17q21.31) and other loci, including IGH, PCMT1, CYP2A13, and SMCP. In the H1/H2 haplotype region, there is a burden of rare deletions and duplications (P = 6.73×10-3) in PSP. Conclusions: Through WGS, we significantly enhanced our understanding of the genetic basis of PSP, providing new targets for exploring disease mechanisms and therapeutic interventions.

Mapping the genetic landscape of early-onset Alzheimer's disease in a cohort of 36 families.

BACKGROUND: Many families with clinical early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) remain genetically unexplained. A combination of genetic factors is not standardly investigated. In addition to monogenic causes, we evaluated the possible polygenic architecture in a large series of families, to assess if genetic testing of familial EOAD could be expanded. METHODS: Thirty-six pedigrees (77 patients) were ascertained from a larger cohort of patients, with relationships determined by genetic data (exome sequencing data and/or SNP arrays). All families included at least one AD patient with symptom onset <70 years. We evaluated segregating rare variants in known dementia-related genes, and other genes or variants if shared by multiple families. APOE was genotyped and duplications in APP were assessed by targeted test or using SNP array data. We computed polygenic risk scores (PRS) compared with a reference population-based dataset, by imputing SNP arrays or exome sequencing data. RESULTS: In eight families, we identified a pathogenic variant, including the genes APP, PSEN1, SORL1, and an unexpected GRN frameshift variant. APOE-ε4 homozygosity was present in eighteen families, showing full segregation with disease in seven families. Eight families harbored a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), of which six included APOE-ε4 homozygous carriers. PRS was not higher in the families combined compared with the population mean (beta 0.05, P = 0.21), with a maximum increase of 0.61 (OR = 1.84) in the GRN family. Subgroup analyses indicated lower PRS in six APP/PSEN1 families compared with the rest (beta -0.22 vs. 0.10; P = 0.009) and lower APOE burden in all eight families with monogenic cause (beta 0.29 vs. 1.15, P = 0.010). Nine families remained without a genetic cause or risk factor identified. CONCLUSION: Besides monogenic causes, we suspect a polygenic disease architecture in multiple families based on APOE and rare VUS. The risk conveyed by PRS is modest across the studied families. Families without any identified risk factor render suitable candidates for further in-depth genetic evaluation.

Underlying genetic variation in familial frontotemporal dementia: sequencing of 198 patients.

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) presents with a wide variability in clinical syndromes, genetic etiologies, and underlying pathologies. Despite the discovery of pathogenic variants in several genes, many familial cases remain unsolved. In a large FTD cohort of 198 familial patients, we aimed to determine the types and frequencies of variants in genes related to FTD. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were revealed in 74 (37%) patients, including 4 novel variants. The repeat expansion in C9orf72 was most common (21%), followed by variants in MAPT (6%), GRN (4.5%), and TARDBP (3.5%). Other pathogenic variants were found in VCP, TBK1, PSEN1, and a novel homozygous variant in OPTN. Furthermore, we identified 15 variants of uncertain significance, including a promising variant in TUBA4A and a frameshift in VCP, for which additional research is needed to confirm pathogenicity. The patients without identified genetic cause demonstrated a wide clinical and pathological variety. Our study contributes to the clinical characterization of the genetic subtypes and confirms the value of whole-exome sequencing in identifying novel genetic variants.

Novel TUBA4A Variant Associated With Familial Frontotemporal Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the strong genetic component of frontotemporal dementia (FTD), a substantial proportion of patients remain genetically unresolved. We performed an in-depth study of a family with an autosomal dominant form of FTD to investigate the underlying genetic cause. METHODS: Following clinical and pathologic characterization of the family, genetic studies included haplotype sharing analysis and exome sequencing. Subsequently, we performed immunohistochemistry, immunoblotting, and a microtubule repolymerization assay to investigate the potential impact of the candidate variant in tubulin alpha 4a (TUBA4A). RESULTS: The clinical presentation in this family is heterogeneous, including behavioral changes, parkinsonian features, and uncharacterized dementia. Neuropathologic examination of 2 patients revealed TAR DNA binding protein 43 (TDP-43) pathology with abundant dystrophic neurites and neuronal intranuclear inclusions, consistent with frontotemporal lobar degeneration-TDP type A. We identified a likely pathogenic variant in TUBA4A segregating with disease. TUBA4A encodes for α-tubulin, which is a major component of the microtubule network. Variants in TUBA4A have been suggested as a rare genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and have sporadically been reported in patients with FTD without supporting genetic segregation. A decreased trend of TUBA4A protein abundance was observed in patients compared with controls, and a microtubule repolymerization assay demonstrated disrupted α-tubulin function. As opposed to variants found in ALS, TUBA4A variants associated with FTD appear more localized to the N-terminus, indicating different pathogenic mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the role of TUBA4A variants as rare genetic cause of familial FTD.

Imaging and fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia.

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD), the second most common type of presenile dementia, is a heterogeneous neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive behavioural and/or language problems, and includes a range of clinical, genetic and pathological subtypes. The diagnostic process is hampered by this heterogeneity, and correct diagnosis is becoming increasingly important to enable future clinical trials of disease-modifying treatments. Reliable biomarkers will enable us to better discriminate between FTD and other forms of dementia and to predict disease progression in the clinical setting. Given that different underlying pathologies probably require specific pharmacological interventions, robust biomarkers are essential for the selection of patients with specific FTD subtypes. This Review emphasizes the increasing availability and potential applications of structural and functional imaging biomarkers, and cerebrospinal fluid and blood fluid biomarkers in sporadic and genetic FTD. The relevance of new MRI modalities - such as voxel-based morphometry, diffusion tensor imaging and arterial spin labelling - in the early stages of FTD is discussed, together with the ability of these modalities to classify FTD subtypes. We highlight promising new fluid biomarkers for staging and monitoring of FTD, and underline the importance of large, multicentre studies of individuals with presymptomatic FTD. Harmonization in the collection and analysis of data across different centres is crucial for the implementation of new biomarkers in clinical practice, and will become a great challenge in the next few years.