Alzheimer’s disease (AD) exhibits a disproportionately high prevalence within the African American community, affecting individuals at an incidence rate nearly double that observed in the White or European-ancestry population in the United States. This significant disparity is understood to be influenced by a complex interplay of socioeconomic and systemic factors. These include persistent inequalities in healthcare access, differential educational opportunities, and historical biases embedded within cognitive assessment methodologies. Furthermore, African Americans experience higher rates of comorbid health conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, both of which are established risk modifiers for the development of Alzheimer’s.
Historically, research into the genetic underpinnings of Alzheimer’s disease has predominantly focused on brain tissue analyses from individuals of European ancestry or mixed-ancestry cohorts. While gene expression studies, which measure the quantitative output of genes in the form of proteins, have been conducted, the inclusion of African American participants in such investigations has often been limited, with sample sizes frequently insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions about population-specific genetic patterns. This historical research gap has presented a significant hurdle in fully understanding the multifaceted biological mechanisms that contribute to Alzheimer’s pathology across diverse populations.
A groundbreaking study, representing the most extensive examination of brain tissue from African American donors afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease to date, has illuminated a novel set of genes exhibiting altered activity. Conducted by scientists at the Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, this research identified numerous genes whose expression levels differed significantly between individuals diagnosed with AD and those without the neurodegenerative condition. Crucially, many of these implicated genes had not previously been associated with Alzheimer’s disease in prior genetic research efforts.
Among the genes that demonstrated the most pronounced differential expression was ADAMTS2, a gene whose activity level was found to be 1.5-fold higher in brain tissue obtained from individuals with autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer’s disease compared to control samples. This elevated expression of ADAMTS2 emerged as the strongest genetic signal within the analyzed cohort, suggesting a potentially pivotal role in the disease’s pathological cascade.
The robustness of these findings was further substantiated through analysis of gene expression data derived from post-mortem prefrontal cortex tissue. The research team meticulously examined samples from 207 African American brain donors, comprising 125 individuals with pathologically confirmed AD and 82 individuals serving as controls. These valuable tissue samples were sourced from 14 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Alzheimer’s Disease Research Centers strategically located across the United States, ensuring a broad and representative sample base.
Significantly, ADAMTS2 not only emerged as the most differentially expressed gene within the African American cohort but also ranked as the top finding in an independent study conducted by the same research group. This secondary investigation utilized brain tissue from a substantially larger cohort of individuals of European ancestry. In this independent analysis, researchers compared gene expression patterns in individuals with confirmed Alzheimer’s pathology who exhibited clinical symptoms prior to death against those who possessed similar pathological markers but maintained cognitive resilience throughout their lives.
The convergence of findings across these two distinct studies, involving different ancestral groups but employing similar analytical methodologies, represents a landmark achievement in Alzheimer’s genetics research. According to Dr. Lindsay A. Farrer, the corresponding author of the study and Chief of Biomedical Genetics at the Boston University school, this marks the first instance in similarly designed AD genetic studies where the most significant genetic finding has been consistent across both White and African American populations. This shared genetic signature offers compelling evidence for common underlying biological processes driving Alzheimer’s disease, irrespective of ancestral background.
These discoveries hold profound implications for advancing our understanding of the genetic landscape influencing Alzheimer’s risk, particularly within the African American population. Previous research has indicated that many established Alzheimer’s risk variants are often population-specific or exhibit varying frequencies across different ethnic groups. Dr. Farrer elaborates that while African American individuals with AD have been linked to variants in several genes, the overlap with genes associated in European American populations is typically modest. Furthermore, even when genetic associations overlap, the specific variants involved and their magnitude of effect on AD risk often differ. The consistent and substantial elevation in ADAMTS2 expression observed in the brain tissue of both African American and White individuals with AD not only points towards a shared biological pathway contributing to the disease but also underscores the imperative for intensified research into this gene. Such investigations could ultimately determine its viability as a potential therapeutic target for Alzheimer’s disease.
The comprehensive findings of this pivotal study have been formally published online in Alzheimer’s & Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, a leading peer-reviewed publication in the field.
The research was made possible through substantial financial support from numerous National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, including but not limited to R01-AG048927, U01-AG058654, U54-AG052427, U19-AG068753, U01-AG062602, P30-AG072978, U01-081230, P01-AG003949, P30-AG062677, P30-AG062421, P30-AG066507, P30-AG066511, P30-AG072972, P30-AG066468, R01-AG072474, RF1-AG066107, U24-AG056270, P01-AG003949, RF1-AG082339, RF1-NS118584, P30-AG072946, P01-AG003991, P30-AG066444, P01-AG026276, P30-AG066462, P30-AG072958, and P30-AG072978. Additional funding was provided by awards from the Florida Department of Health, specifically 8AZ06 and 20A22. It is important to note that these funding entities played no role in the study’s design, the collection and analysis of data, the interpretation of results, the drafting of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the research for publication, ensuring the independence and objectivity of the scientific process.
Several researchers involved in this study disclosed potential conflicts of interest and funding relationships that have been meticulously documented. Mark Logue received grants from the NIH and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Marla Gearing, Lee-Way Jin, Richard Mayeux, Richard Perrin, Shih-Hsiu Wang, and Lindsay Farrer were recipients of grants from the NIH. Melissa Murray’s research was supported by NIH grants; she also served as a paid consultant for Biogen Pharmaceuticals and participated in committees for the Alzheimer’s Association and the International Conference on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s Diseases. Thor Stein’s work was supported by grants from the NIH and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and he received an honorarium from Brown University. Andrew Teich’s contributions were funded by NIH grants, a contract from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and an honorarium from Ono Pharmaceuticals; he holds stock in Ionis Pharmaceuticals and Biogen Pharmaceuticals and has served on committees for the Department of Defense and the Alzheimer’s Association. The efforts of Katarnut Tobunluepop and Zihan Wang were supported by NIH grants. Benjamin Wolozin received grants from the NIH, consulting fees from Aquinnah Pharmaceuticals and Abbingworth Ventures, and honoraria for multiple lectures; he also owns stock and holds the positions of Co-Founder and CSO at Aquinnah Pharmaceuticals Inc. The remaining authors have declared no competing interests. This transparency ensures that the scientific community can fully assess the context of the findings.
About the Author
