Gene expression profiles complement the analysis of genomic modifiers of the clinical onset of Huntington disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Huntington disease (HD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that is caused by a CAG repeat expansion in HTT. The length of this repeat, however, only explains a proportion of the variability in age of onset in patients. Genome-wide association studies have identified modifiers that contribute toward a proportion of the observed variance. By incorporating tissue-specific transcriptomic information with these results, additional modifiers can be identified. We performed a transcriptome-wide association study assessing heritable differences in genetically determined expression in diverse tissues, with genome-wide data from over 4000 patients. Functional validation of prioritized genes was undertaken in isogenic HD stem cells and patient brains. Enrichment analyses were performed with biologically relevant gene sets to identify the core pathways. HD-associated gene coexpression modules were assessed for associations with neurological phenotypes in an independent cohort and to guide drug repurposing analyses. Transcriptomic analyses identified genes that were associated with age of HD onset and displayed colocalization with gene expression signals in brain tissue (FAN1, GPR161, PMS2, SUMF2), with supporting evidence from functional experiments. This included genes involved in DNA repair, as well as novel-candidate modifier genes that have been associated with other neurological conditions. Further, cortical coexpression modules were also associated with cognitive decline and HD-related traits in a longitudinal cohort. In summary, the combination of population-scale gene expression information with HD patient genomic data identified novel modifier genes for the disorder. Further, these analyses expanded the pathways potentially involved in modifying HD onset and prioritized candidate therapeutics for future study.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".