A genetic association study of glutamine-encoding DNA sequence structures, somatic CAG expansion, and DNA repair gene variants, with Huntington disease clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Huntington disease (HD) is caused by an unstable CAG/CAA repeat expansion encoding a toxic polyglutamine tract. Here, we tested the hypotheses that HD outcomes are impacted by somatic expansion of, and polymorphisms within, the HTT CAG/CAA glutamine-encoding repeat, and DNA repair genes. Methods The sequence of the glutamine-encoding repeat and the proportion of somatic CAG expansions in blood DNA from participants inheriting 40 to 50 CAG repeats within the TRACK-HD and Enroll-HD cohorts were determined using high-throughput ultra-deep-sequencing. Candidate gene polymorphisms were genotyped using kompetitive allele-specific PCR (KASP). Genotypic associations were assessed using time-to-event and regression analyses. Findings Using data from 203 TRACK-HD and 531 Enroll-HD participants, we show that individuals with higher blood DNA somatic CAG repeat expansion scores have worse HD outcomes: a one-unit increase in somatic expansion score was associated with a Cox hazard ratio for motor onset of 3·05 (95% CI = 1·94 to 4·80, p = 1·3 × 10 −6 ). We also show that individual-specific somatic expansion scores are associated with variants in FAN1 ( pFDR = 4·8 × 10 -6 ), MLH3 ( pFDR = 8·0 × 10 −4 ), MLH1 ( pFDR = 0·004) and MSH3 ( pFDR = 0·009). We also show that HD outcomes are best predicted by the number of pure CAGs rather than total encoded-glutamines. Interpretation These data establish pure CAG length, rather than encoded-glutamine, as the key inherited determinant of downstream pathophysiology. These findings have implications for HD diagnostics, and support somatic expansion as a mechanistic link for genetic modifiers of clinical outcomes, a driver of disease, and potential therapeutic target in HD and related repeat expansion disorders. Funding CHDI Foundation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".