Genome-wide association study of copy number variations in Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To investigate the impact of copy number variations (CNVs) on Parkinson’s disease (PD) pathogenesis using genome-wide data and explore their role in sporadic PD. Methods We analyzed CNV data from 11,035 PD patients (including 2,731 early-onset PD (EOPD)) and 8,901 controls from the COURAGE-PD consortium using a sliding window CNV-GWAS and genome-wide burden analysis. The independent dataset from the Global Parkinson Genetics Program (GP2) consisted of 23,089 cases and 18,824 controls were used to validate our initial findings. Results The exploratory dataset identifies multiple CNV regions associated with PD risk. The nominated CNV loci were not confirmed in an independent dataset, except that only a deletion in the PRKN gene, a well-established EOPD locus, remained genome-wide significant and robustly supported. CNV burden analysis showed a higher prevalence of CNVs in PD-related genes in patients compared to controls (OR=1.56 [1.18-2.09], p=0.0013), with PRKN showing the highest burden (OR=1.47 [1.10-1.98], p=0.026). Patients with CNVs in PRKN had an earlier disease onset. Burden analysis with controls and EOPD patients showed similar results. Interpretation The largest CNV-based GWAS on PD highlights both the promise and pitfalls of array-based CNV detection in PD and underscores the relevance of whole-genome sequencing approaches in resolving the role of CNV in PD. The array-based findings are prone towards false positive findings that might arise either from platform limitations and/or cohort biases. Future studies require improved genotyping resolution and rigorous cross-cohort validation to reliably assess CNV contributions to PD risk.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".