Impact of Common Variations in PLD3 on Neuroimaging Phenotypes in Non-demented Elders
- 308 Downloads
Rare variants of phospholipase D3 (PLD3) have been identified as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) susceptibility loci, whereas little is known about the potential role of common variants in the progression of AD. To examine the impact of genetic variations in PLD3 on neuroimaging phenotypes in a large non-demented population. A total of 261 normal cognition (NC) and 456 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) individuals from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database are included in our analysis. Multiple linear regression models were applied to examine the association between four single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; rs7249146, rs4490097, rs12151243, and rs10407447) with the florbetapir retention on florbetapir 18F amyloid positron emission tomography (AV45-PET), the cerebral metabolic rate for glucose (CMRgl) on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET), and regional volume on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and in the cohort study. We did not detect any significant associations of PLD3 SNPs with florbetapir retention on AV45-PET. In the analysis of FDG-PET, rs10407447 was associated with the CMRgl in the left angular gyrus and bilateral posterior cingulate cortex in the MCI group. Regarding the MRI analysis, rs10407447 was also associated with bilateral inferior lateral ventricle and lateral ventricle volume in MCI group. The main findings of our study provide evidence that support the possible role of PLD3 common variants in influencing AD-related neuroimaging phenotypes. Nevertheless, further work is necessary to explain the functional mechanisms of differences and confirm the causal variants.
KeywordsAlzheimer’s disease PLD3 Neuroimaging Association
Data collection and sharing for this project was funded by the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health Grant U01 AG024904) and DOD ADNI (Department of Defense award number W81XWH-12-2-0012). This research was also supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81171209, 81371406, 81000544), the Shandong Provincial Outstanding Medical Academic Professional Program, and the Qingdao Key Health Discipline Development Fund.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
- 11.Saykin AJ, Shen L, Foroud TM, Potkin SG, Swaminathan S, Kim S, Risacher SL, Nho K et al (2010) Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative biomarkers as quantitative phenotypes: Genetics core aims, progress, and plans. Alzheimers Dement : J Alzheimers Assoc 6(3):265–273. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2010.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Wu TC, Wilde EA, Bigler ED, Yallampalli R, McCauley SR, Troyanskaya M, Chu Z, Li X et al (2010) Evaluating the relationship between memory functioning and cingulum bundles in acute mild traumatic brain injury using diffusion tensor imaging. J Neurotrauma 27(2):303–307. doi: 10.1089/neu.2009.1110 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Nestor SM, Rupsingh R, Borrie M, Smith M, Accomazzi V, Wells JL, Fogarty J, Bartha R (2008) Ventricular enlargement as a possible measure of Alzheimer’s disease progression validated using the Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative database. Brain : J Neurol 131(Pt 9):2443–2454. doi: 10.1093/brain/awn146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Thompson PM, Hayashi KM, de Zubicaray G, Janke AL, Rose SE, Semple J, Herman D, Hong MS et al (2003) Dynamics of gray matter loss in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci : Off J Soc Neurosci 23(3):994–1005Google Scholar
- 28.Kremen WS, Prom-Wormley E, Panizzon MS, Eyler LT, Fischl B, Neale MC, Franz CE, Lyons MJ et al (2010) Genetic and environmental influences on the size of specific brain regions in midlife: the VETSA MRI study. NeuroImage 49(2):1213–1223. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.043 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.Madsen SK, Ho AJ, Hua X, Saharan PS, Toga AW, Jack CR Jr, Weiner MW, Thompson PM (2010) 3D maps localize caudate nucleus atrophy in 400 Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elderly subjects. Neurobiol Aging 31(8):1312–1325. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.05.002 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar