MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390198854 · doi:10.1002/alz.074162

Relationships between polymorphisms in keratin genes and Alzheimer’s disease phenotypes.

2023· article· en· W4390198854 on OpenAlexaff
Yuen Yan Wong, Lisa Y. Xiong, Daniel K Mori‐Fegan, Shiropa Noor, Meghan J. Chenoweth, Saira Saeed Mirza, Mario Masellis, Sandra E. Black, Walter Swardfager

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSkin and Cellular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Dementia Research AllianceToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreHeart and Stroke FoundationCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismMinor allele frequencyGeneticsAlzheimer's diseaseBiologyGenome-wide association studyHyperintensityPathologyMedicineGeneGenotypeDiseaseMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Keratins are genetically polymorphic and are the largest subset of intermediate filaments. Keratins are also implicated in signaling pathways, inflammation, and disease states. Keratin 9 (KRT9) protein has been identified to have high diagnostic accuracy for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) (PMID:22045497); it was detected in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of AD patients but not healthy controls (PMID:24959311). Plasma keratin 9 concentrations also positively correlated with AD‐associated proteins (e.g., apolipoprotein E and tau) in AD patients (PMID:26973255). Post‐translational modification of keratin 83 (KRT83) protein has been associated with serum asymmetric dimethylarginine levels (PMID:34181092), a vascular risk factor implicated in AD. However, our understanding of the role of genetic variation in AD risk is incomplete. Here, we investigate associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in KRT9, KRT83, and KRT2 (Keratin 2, couples with keratin 9) and AD biomarker phenotypes. Method Individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD, and clinically normal controls were selected among ADNI participants. Participants underwent genome‐wide genotyping. Keratin gene variants were identified from the genome‐wide data using dbSNP variant IDs and genotypes were coded additively. Linkage‐disequilibrium‐based clumping on minor allele frequency (MAF) was applied to prioritize more common SNPs. CSF‐Aβ42, ‐tau, and phosphorylated‐tau (p‐tau) levels were quantified via Roche Elecsys immunoassays. Brain‐Aβ deposition was evaluated via normalized PET‐18F‐AV‐45 cortical summary measures (SUVR). White matter hyperintensities (WMH) were obtained from MRI 3D‐T1 and FLAIR sequences via an automated atlas‐based segmentation pipeline. Linear regression models controlling for age, sex, Mini‐Mental State Exam, APOE‐ε4 status, and head size were used to assess association and interaction effects between SNPs and the AD phenotypes in R. Result Among included participants (n = 907, 73±7.2 years, 44% female), SNPs in KRT2 (e.g. 3’UTR‐variant rs117041267‐G/A; MAF = 1.4%) and KRT83 (e.g. upstream‐variant KRT83‐rs17119838‐C/T; MAF = 15.6%) were associated with higher CSF‐Aβ42 concentrations (F (2,905) = 4.26,p = 0.014; and F (2,905) = 6.61,p = 0.0014, respectively). Upstream‐variant KRT83‐rs182354391‐C/G (MAF = 1%) showed an association with lower CSF‐tau (F (1,904) = 5.44,p = 0.020). Multiple KRT9 and KRT2 SNPs also showed association with WMH, while KRT2 and KRT83 intron variants showed associations with PET‐Aβ. Conclusion These candidate gene analyses suggest involvement of multiple keratin family genes in AD, as indicated by differences in amyloid and tau biomarkers, and white matter disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicSkin and Cellular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207