Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Genetics and genetic counseling: Recommendations for Alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

  • Published:
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we discuss the clinical genetics of three neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease), the current application of genetic testing for these diseases, and the role of genetic counseling in familial dementia. We review the literature addressing the clinical application of these genetic findings, including susceptibility testing and predictive testing. In addition, we share our own experience working with families with familial neurodegenerative disease, the genetic counseling process, and the major issues that need attention in the genetic counseling setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Baty B, Venne V, McDonald J, et al.: BRCA1 Testing: Genetic counseling protocol development and counseling issues. J Genet Counseling 1997, 6:223–244.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lannfelt L, Axelman K, Lilius L, Basun H: Genetic counseling in a Swedish Alzheimer family with amyloid precursor protein mutation. Am J Hum Genet 1995, 56:332–335.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tabrizi SJ, Elliot CL, Weissman C: Ethical issues in human prion diseases. Br Med Bull 2003, 66:305–316. This review describes the role of genetic testing in familial prion diseases using the lessons learned from the experience in Huntington’s disease predictive and prenatal testing. The authors also review the ethical issues in research, diagnostic testing, and treatment of prion diseases.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. International Huntington Association (IHA) and World Federation of Neurology (WFN): Guidelines for the molecular genetics predictive test in Huntington’s disease. Neurology 1994, 44:1533–1536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Small GW, Rabins PV, Barry PP, et al.: Diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer disease and related disorders. Consensus statement of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry, the Alzheimer’s Association, and the American Geriatrics Society. JAMA 1997, 278:1363–1371.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bird TD, Sumi SM, Nemens EJ, et al.: Phenotypic heterogeneity in familial Alzheimer’s disease: a study of 24 kindreds. Ann Neurol 1989, 25:12–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. St. George-Hyslop PH: Molecular genetics of Alzheimer’s disease. Biol Psychiatry 2000, 47:183–199.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Corder EH, Saunders AM, Strittmatter WJ, et al.: Gene dose of apolipoprotein E type 4 allele and the risk of Alzheimer’s disease in late onset families. Science 1993, 261:921–923.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Farrer LA, Cupples LA, Haines JL, et al.: Effects of age, sex and ethnicity on the association between apolipoprotein E genotype and Alzheimer’s disease: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1997, 278:1349–1356.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mayeux R, Stern Y, Ottman R, et al.: The apolipoprotein epsilon 4 allele in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Neurol 1993, 34:752–754.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Pericak-Vance MA, Bass MP, Yamaoka LH, et al.: Complete genomic screen in late-onset familial Alzheimer disease. Evidence for a new locus on chromosome 12. JAMA 1997, 278:1237–1241.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ertekin-Taner N, Graff-Radford N, Younkin LH, et al.: Linkage of plasma Abeta42 to a quantitative locus on chromosome 10 in late-onset Alzheimer’s disease pedigrees. Science 2000, 290:2303–2304.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Myers A, Holmans P, Marshall H, et al.: Susceptibility locus for Alzheimer’s disease on chromosome 10. Science 2000, 290:2304–2305.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Pericak-Vance MA, Grubber J, Bailey LR, et al.: Identification of novel genes in late-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Exp Gerontol 2000, 35:1343–1352.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rocchi A, Pellegrini S, Siciliano G, Murri L: Causative and susceptibility genes for Alzheimer’s disease: a review. Brain Res Bull 2003, 61:1–24. This paper discusses the four genes with a known role in AD: PS1, PS2, APP, and APOE. Other candidate susceptibility genes are reviewed, including a discussion of the potential biologic role each gene may play in the pathologic pathway to disease. This is a comprehensive overview of all potential genetic factors that may play a role in AD.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rogaeva EA, Fafel KC, Song YQ, et al.: Screening for PS1 mutations in a referral-based series of AD cases: 21 novel mutations. Neurology 2001, 57:621–625.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayeux R, Saunders AM, Shea S, et al.: Utility of the apolipoprotein E genotype in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Disease Centers Consortium on Apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer’s Disease. N Engl J Med 1998, 338:506–511.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McConnell LM, Koenig BA, Greely HT, Raffin TA: Genetic testing and Alzheimer disease: recommendations of the Stanford Programs in Genomics, Ethics, and Society. Genet Test 1999, 3:3–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. American College of Medical Genetics/American Society of Human Genetics Working Group on ApoE and Alzheimer disease: Statement on use of apolipoprotein E testing for Alzheimer disease. JAMA 1995, 274:1627–1629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Snowden JS, Neary D, Mann DM: Frontotemporal dementia. Br J Psychiatry 2002, 180:140–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chow TW, Miller BL, Hayashi VN, et al.: Inheritance of frontotemporal dementia. Arch Neurology 1999, 56:817–822.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Poorkaj P, Grossman M, Steinbart E, et al.: Frequency of tau gene mutations in familial and sporadic cases of non-Alzheimer dementia. Arch Neurol 2001, 58:383–387.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Alzheimer Research Forum: http://www.alzforum.org/. Accessed April 2004.

  24. Gene Tests: http:/www.genetests.org. Accessed April 2004.

  25. Mann DM, McDonagh A, Snowden JS, et al.: Molecular classification of the dementias. Lancet 2000, 355:626.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Brown J, Ashworth A, Gydesen S, et al.: Familial non-specific dementia maps to chromosome 3. Hum Mol Genet 1995, 4:1625–1628.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hosler BA, Siddique T, Sapp PC, et al.: Linkage of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with frontotemporal dementia to chromosome 9q21-q22. JAMA 2000, 284:1664–1669.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Gambetti P, Kong Q, Zou W, et al.: Sporadic and familial CJD: classification and characterization. Br Med Bull 2003, 66:213–239. This review classifies sporadic and familial CJD in order to clarify the heterogeneity of the disease using the PRNP genotype and the PrP isoform type. Familial CJD is classified into many haplotypes based on the PRNP mutation and codon 129 on the mutant allele. The clinical and pathologic features are summarized.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wadsworth JD, Hill AF, Beck JA, Collinge J: Molecular and clinical classification of human prion disease. Br Med Bull 2003, 66:241–254.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Gambetti P, Parchi P, Petersen RB, et al.: Fatal familial insomnia and familial Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: clinical, pathological and molecular features. Brain Pathol 1995, 5:43–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ghetti B, Piccardo P, Frangione B, et al.: Prion protein amyloidosis. Brain Pathol 1996, 6:127–145.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Greicius MD, Geschwind MD, Miller BL: Presenile dementia syndromes: an update on taxonomy and diagnosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002, 72:691–700.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Integrating genetic services into clinical care. In Genetic Testing and Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine. Albany: New York State Task Force on Life and the Law; 2000: 345–386.

  34. Evers-Kiebooms G, Welkenhuysen M, Claes E, et al.: The psychological complexity of predictive testing for late onset neurogenetic diseases and hereditary cancers: implications for multidisciplinary counseling and for genetic education. Social Sci Med 2000, 51:831–841. The authors review the challenges of predictive testing in two disease categories (cancer and neurogenetic) and argue for the necessity of a multidisciplinary approach given the psychologic issues in prediction of late-onset disease.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McKinnon WC, Baty BJ, Bennett RL, et al.: Predisposition genetic testing for late-onset disorders in adults. A position paper of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. JAMA 1997, 278:1217–1220.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Goldman JS, Miller BL, Safar J, et al.: When sporadic disease is not sporadic—the potential for a genetic etiology. Arch Neurol 2004, 61:213–216. The authors discuss the genetic etiology of neurodegenerative diseases and the need for comprehensive genetic counseling, including pretest counseling in order to prepare families for the potential for a genetic diagnosis. They review three cases of familial AD and CJD and discuss how pretest counseling allows a family to prepare and to make informed decisions about testing. A table addresses key issues to be discussed with patients or their families before diagnostic genetic testing of neurodegenerative diseases.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Alzheimer Association: http:/www.alz.org/. Accessed April 2004.

  38. Marteau T, Lerman C: Genetic risk and behavioural change. BMJ 2001, 332:1056–1059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lloyd FJ, Reyna VF, Whalen P: Accuracy and ambiguity in counseling patients about genetic risk. Arch Inter Med 2001, 161:2411–2413.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hofman KJ, Tambor ES, Chase GA, et al.: Physicians’ knowledge of genetics and genetic tests. Acad Med 1993, 68:625–632.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Sankar P: Genetic privacy. Annu Rev Med 2003, 54:393–407.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Hall MA: Genetic Discrimination. Research Triangle Park, NC. North Carolina Genomics and Bioinformatics Consortium; 2003:1-4.

  43. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Public Law 104-191, US Statutes at Large 110, 1996.

  44. Lerman C, Croyle RT, Tercyak KP, Hamann H: Genetic testing: psychological aspects and implications. J Consulting Clin Psychol 2002, 70:784–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Steinbart EJ, Smith CO, Poorkaj P, Bird TD: Impact of DNA testing for early-onset familial Alzheimer disease and frontotemporal dementia. Arch Neurol 2001, 58:1828–1831.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Sobel S, Cowan CB: Ambiguous loss and disenfranchised grief: the impact of DNA predictive testing on the family as a system. Family Process 2003, 42:47–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Quaid KA, Murrell JR, Hake AM, et al.: Presymptomatic genetic testing with an APP mutation in early onset Alzheimer disease: a descriptive study of sibship dynamics. J Genet Counsel 2000, 9:327–345.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Verlinsky Y, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky O, et al.: Preimplantation diagnosis for early-onset Alzheimer disease caused by V717L mutation. JAMA 2002, 287:1018–1021.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Roberts JS, LaRusse SA, Katzen H, et al.: Reasons for seeking genetic susceptibility testing among first-degree relatives of people with Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2003, 17:86–93. This study examines the attitudes and motivations of individuals participating in the first randomized trial of susceptibility testing for AD. The most commonly endorsed reasons for pursuing testing were 1) to contribute to research, 2) to arrange personal affairs, and 3) the hope that effective treatment will be developed. It is interesting to note the strongest predictor of actual pursuit of testing was the need to prepare family members for AD.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Taub Institute for Research on Alzheimer’s Disease and the Aging Brain and the Gertrude H. Sergievsky Center, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, P&S Box 16, 10032, New York, NY, USA

    Jennifer Williamson MS & Susan LaRusse MS

Authors
  1. Jennifer Williamson MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan LaRusse MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Williamson, J., LaRusse, S. Genetics and genetic counseling: Recommendations for Alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 4, 351–357 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-004-0081-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-004-0081-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation