In addition to the genetics of FAD in which mutations in specific genes “cause” AD, there are genes that confer risk for developing LOAD. For example, the gene encoding apolipoprotein E (
APOE) has by far the greatest effect on risk for developing AD; the presence of specific apoE alleles has been correlated with the risk of developing LOAD and CAA. There are three common alleles of apoE in humans (ε2, ε3, and ε4) that only differ in sequence by one amino acid at either position 112 or 158 of the protein. The ε4 allele is a genetic risk factor for LOAD, whereas the ε2 allele is protective (
114,
115). One copy of ε4 increases risk for AD by ~3-fold and two copies by ~12-fold (
www.alzgene.org).
APOEε4 alleles are also associated with a dose-dependent decrease in age at onset (~5yrs/ε4 allele) in both sporadic and familial forms of AD (
114,
116). These findings have been substantiated in populations around the world. In CAA, the ε4 allele is associated with greater levels of cerebrovascular amyloid deposition and hemorrhage in the CNS (
117,
118); the ε2 allele has been linked to a greater risk of CAA-associated vasculopathy and CNS hemorrhage (
119,
120). Given that the common feature linking AD and CAA is the excessive deposition and accumulation of Aβ and that apoE is an Aβ binding molecule, it is likely that a major reason apoE is linked to both disorders is through direct effects on Aβ metabolism (
121). ApoE is an important regulator of plasma lipoprotein metabolism (
122,
123). In addition to expression in the liver, apoE is also produced at high levels within the CNS where it is present in high density lipoprotein (HDL)-like lipoproteins secreted predominantly by astrocytes (
121). Although apoE can play a role in a variety of processes in the CNS including cholesterol transport, neuronal plasticity, and inflammation (
121), its exact function in normal and disease conditions remains to be clarified.
There are several hypotheses about how apoE may influence AD pathogenesis. Accumulating
in vitro and
in vivo evidence suggests that apoE acts as an Aβ binding molecule influencing the clearance of soluble Aβ as well as the propensity for Aβ to aggregate by affecting Aβ seeding and polymerization (
121). Both of these processes may directly influence Aβ aggregation
in vivo. Both pathological and neuroimaging studies of cognitively normal humans as well as AD patients have found that Aβ deposition occurs earlier and to a greater extent in those who are
ε4-positive versus those who are
ε4-negative, with two copies of
ε4 being significantly worse than one (
124–
126). This appears likely to initiate the Aβ pathophysiological cascade earlier in life. Studies using APP transgenic mice that develop Aβ deposition have provided direct evidence that apoE influences the level, amount, and structure of intraparenchymal deposits of Aβ in the brain as well as CAA in an isoform-specific fashion (
ε4>ε3>
ε2) (
127–
130). Recent studies in humans have confirmed that the
APOE genotype is strongly associated with Aβ phenotypes such as Aβ deposition and CSF Aβ42 levels but not with CSF tau levels (
125,
131). In addition to apoE, there are other Aβ-binding molecules such as apolipoprotein J/clusterin (
132,
133), α2-macroglobulin (α2-M) (
134), transthyretin (
135), and α1-antichymotrypsin (
136), that may play a role in Aβ aggregation in the brain by influencing cellular uptake and degradation of Aβ locally by cells, its local retention in the brain (
137), and ultimately its removal from the brain into the systemic circulation.
Approximately 50% of individuals with AD carry an
APOEε4 allele suggesting that other genetic factors must contribute to risk for disease. Despite hundreds of studies during the last fifteen years, few reported genetic associations have been replicated across studies (see
www.alzgene.org) (
138). The main reason for this is that other genetic risk factors have a much smaller impact on risk than that of the
APOE genotype. As a result the sample sizes used in these earlier studies were too small to have the power to detect these genes. During the last few years several technological advances have transformed the landscape regarding the genetics of common complex traits such as AD (
139,
140). The first of these was the development of genome-wide arrays that allowed the simultaneous evaluation of millions of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in thousands of samples. The use of these arrays in thousands of samples from AD cases and non-demented elderly controls has resulted in compelling evidence for a number of new genetic risk factors including association with genes encoding clusterin (CLU), phosphatidylinositol-binding clathrin assembly protein (PICALM), complement receptor 1 (CR1), bridging integrator protein 1 (BIN1), and sialic acid binding Ig-like lectin (CD33) (
141–
144). Two subsequent studies each including over eight thousand cases and a similar number of controls have identified additional genes with genome-wide significant evidence for association (<5× 10
−8) including
membrane spanning 4A gene cluster (MS4A4A),CD2-associated protein (CD2AP), Ephrin receptor A1 (EPHA1), and
ATP-binding cassette transporter (ABCA7) (
145,
146). The functional alleles responsible for each of these associations have yet to be determined. However, the common SNPs identified in these genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have odds ratios of 1.1–1.2. The
odds ratio is a measure of
effect size, describing the strength of
association or non-
independence between two binary
data values. This suggests that the effect of these risk alleles is much smaller than that of
APOEε4 unless they are tagging rare alleles of larger effect. Estimates of the population attributable fractions for these new candidate genes are between 2.72–5.97%, with a cumulative population-attributable fraction for non-
APOE loci estimated to be around 35%. However, the actual effect sizes are likely to be much smaller than these estimates because of the ‘winner’s curse’, a bias away from the null sometimes seen in GWAS studies. In comparison, the population-attributable fraction for
APOEε4 is 20%. Five of these AD risk loci
(CLU, CR1, ABCA7, CD33 and
EPHA1) have putative functions in the immune system; four are involved in processes at the cell membrane, including endocytosis (
PICALM, BIN1, CD33, CD2AP) and three are involved in lipid biology (
APOE, CLU and
ABCA7). These new gene discoveries provide new impetus for focused studies aimed at understanding the pathogenesis of AD (). Though some of the new genes appear to be involved in Aβ metabolism (e.g.
CLU), the fact that several may influence inflammation, endocytosis, and lipid biology suggests the intriguing possibility that if one can effectively target the specific components of the pathways these gene products are telling us about, novel directions for drug discovery and avenues for treatment may be available distinct from directly targeting Aβ or tau. It is also possible that some of the new genetic discoveries are not targeting the nearby gene but actually targeting non-coding RNAs. If so, this could also provide new insights.
| Table 1Late onset Alzheimer’s disease risk alleles that show genome-wide significant association in at least one study (adapted from Naj et al., Nature Genetics (in press). |
There has been much discussion in the literature about the “missing heritability” – the observation that new genes identified through GWAS do not explain all of the genetic heritability of most traits, which can be estimated in twin studies (
147). One possibility is that the SNPs on the GWAS chips do not capture all of the genetic variation associated with AD; another possibility is that variants tagged by SNPs on the chips failed to reach genome-wide significance because the sample size used was insufficient. The second possibility can be overcome by increasing sample size through meta-analysis. The first possibility may be overcome either by genotyping GWAS chips with more SNPs or by DNA sequencing. Recent advances in sequencing technology have resulted in a sharp decrease in sequencing costs. Rare sequence variants that cause or increase risk for AD are likely to be found by whole exome and whole genome sequencing. This approach has already proved very effective in identifying causative genes for rare recessive disorders (
148). Exome sequencing studies are likely to start soon in families with late-onset AD and will likely lead to the identification of new AD genes in the future. Though identification of new genes may lead to new insights into AD pathogenesis and new therapeutic targets, it may still be challenging to translate such targets into effective therapies. While
APOE is the strongest genetic risk factor for AD, it is still not clear whether and how it can be directly targeted effectively.
Approaches for identifying new risk factors associated with other aspects of the LOAD phenotype are still in their infancy but include genetic studies for elucidating the rate of disease progression; age at onset; CSF or plasma biomarker measurements; and functional and structural imaging measures to mention just a few (
149,
150). An advantage of these quantitative traits is the ability to select individuals from the extremes of the trait distribution. Sequencing of the known AD genes in individuals who are in the top and bottom 10% for Aβ42 concentration in CSF has led to the identification of a late onset AD family carrying a known
PSEN1 mutation (
86). In another study, SNPs within the
PPP3R1 gene, encoding the regulatory subunit of calcineurin, were associated with higher CSF concentrations of tau and phosphorylated tau, and increased tangle pathology (
151). In AD cases, the alleles associated with higher CSF tau and phosphorylated tau were also associated with a more rapid disease progression.
Genes obviously do not act in a vacuum. However, a major bottleneck has been that relatively little is yet understood about the way genetic and environmental factors combine to moderate or exacerbate the risk for AD. If such interactions can be better understood, it may suggest clearcut ways to alter AD risk in genetically predisposed populations. A challenge will be to study large number of cognitively normal middle aged individuals with differential genetic risk for AD to determine if common modifiable environmental and genetic factors clearly interact to increase risk. Some such studies are currently underway. Epidemiological studies have demonstrated that age, family history and head injury with loss of consciousness influence risk for AD. Overall, head injury is associated with an odds ratio of around 2 (
152–
154). However, when
APOE genotype is incorporated into these analyses it is apparent that the risk associated with head injury is substantially higher (odds ratio 15–20) in individuals with an
APOEε4 allele. The mechanisms underlying this interaction is still poorly understood. Higher education levels have been associated with a lower risk for AD (
155), and the notion of brain or cognitive “reserve” (a greater number of neurons or connections) has been invoked to explain this difference (
156). The concept of reserve suggests that some individuals have more capacity to tolerate AD neuropathology without becoming symptomatic; educational attainment is a surrogate for “reserve”. A recent imaging study has demonstrated that among individuals with Aβ deposition, those with higher education had better cognitive scores on a number of measures (
157), consistent with the reserve hypothesis.
APOE genotype was not examined in this study but may combine with education to moderate this effect on cognition. Animal studies have also demonstrated that environmental enrichment can delay Aβ deposition and improve cognition in mouse models (
158,
159). Analyses in human subjects also demonstrate that active individuals who meet the exercise guidelines set by the American Heart Association have significantly less amyloid deposition in the brain(
160). In this study the associations between exercise engagement and amyloid deposition were more prominent in
APOEε4 non-carriers.