Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Genetics

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Corticobasal degeneration (CBD), progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and a subset of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are neurodegenerative disorders characterized by tau inclusions in neurons and glia (tauopathies). Although clinical, pathological and genetic evidence suggests overlapping pathobiology between CBD, PSP, and FTD, the relationship between these disorders is still not well understood. Using summary statistics (odds ratios and p values) from large genome-wide association studies (total n = 14,286 cases and controls) and recently established genetic methods, we investigated the genetic overlap between CBD and PSP and CBD and FTD. We found up to 800-fold enrichment of genetic risk in CBD across different levels of significance for PSP or FTD. In addition to NSF (tagging the MAPT H1 haplotype), we observed that SNPs in or near MOBP, CXCR4, EGFR, and GLDC showed significant genetic overlap between CBD and PSP, whereas only SNPs tagging the MAPT haplotype overlapped between CBD and FTD. The risk alleles of the shared SNPs were associated with expression changes in cis-genes. Evaluating transcriptome levels across adult human brains, we found a unique neuroanatomic gene expression signature for each of the five overlapping gene loci (omnibus ANOVA p < 2.0 × 10 -16 ). Functionally, we found that these shared risk genes were associated with protein interaction and gene co-expression networks and showed enrichment for several neurodevelopmental pathways. Our findings suggest: (1) novel genetic overlap between CBD and PSP beyond the MAPT locus; (2) strong ties between CBD and FTD through the MAPT clade, and (3) unique combinations of overlapping genes that may, in part, influence selective regional or neuronal vulnerability observed in specific tauopathies.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Yokoyama, J. S., Karch, C. M., Fan, C. C., Bonham, L. W., Kouri, N., Ross, O. A., et al. (2017). Shared genetic risk between corticobasal degeneration, progressive supranuclear palsy, and frontotemporal dementia. Acta neuropathologica. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-017-1693-y

Vancouver

Yokoyama JS, Karch CM, Fan CC, Bonham LW, Kouri N, Ross OA, et al. Shared genetic risk between corticobasal degeneration, progressive supranuclear palsy, and frontotemporal dementia. Acta neuropathologica. 2017. doi:10.1007/s00401-017-1693-y. PMID: 28271184.

BibTeX

@article{yokoyama2017-28271184,
  author  = {Yokoyama, J. S. and Karch, C. M. and Fan, C. C. and Bonham, L. W. and Kouri, N. and Ross, O. A. and Rademakers, R. and Kim, J. and others},
  title   = {{Shared genetic risk between corticobasal degeneration, progressive supranuclear palsy, and frontotemporal dementia}},
  journal = {Acta neuropathologica},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1007/s00401-017-1693-y},
  pmid    = {28271184},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-017-1693-y}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 53/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 31 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 53 of 100. Total 53 of 100.31 of the 58 points we could judge = 53 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 53 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Acta neuropathologica)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 4 / 4 14,286 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28271184)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 31 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100.
Total 53 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Genetics

Also in Genetics

212 studies in the library are filed under Genetics with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Genetics hub.

Similar studies

More on Genetics

See all studies in Genetics →