Characterising the motif composition and allele length distribution of ZFHX3 GGC repeat expansions in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract A pathogenic GGC repeat expansion in zinc finger homeobox 3 ( ZFHX3 ), encoding a pure polyglycine (polyG) tract, causes spinocerebellar ataxia type 4 (SCA4). Intermediate expansions of other SCA loci have been implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), while repeat motif composition is recognised to influence pathogenicity in neurodegenerative diseases. Given the genetic pleiotropy between ALS and SCA, we evaluated whether ZFHX3 GGC expansions are associated with ALS and characterised repeat motif composition. ZFHX3 GGC repeat sizes were genotyped using ExpansionHunter in short-read whole-genome sequencing data from ALS cases and healthy controls of European ancestry. Repeat sizes were visually inspected using REViewer, and motif configurations were manually derived from a subset. Receiver operating characteristic analysis and Youden’s J statistic identified a candidate repeat size threshold. Logistic regression tested associations of repeat length and motif composition with ALS, while regression models assessed clinical phenotypes. Across 5785 ALS cases and 7982 controls, no association was observed between ZFHX3 expansions and ALS risk. Longer alleles showed a nominal association with later disease onset, however this did not remain significant after Bonferroni correction. Among 802 ALS cases and 800 controls, 50 distinct motif compositions were identified, including 11 encoding pure polyG tracts characteristic of pathogenic SCA4 expansions; none were associated with ALS. Although no association with ALS was observed, this study established the dynamic nature of ZFHX3 repeat motif composition and configuration. Variation within and between repeat sizes, including pure polyG repeats, supports consideration of motif composition alongside allele length when evaluating neurodegenerative disease risk.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.