Back

Association of Alzheimer's disease polygenic risk score with concussion severity and recovery metrics

Dybing, K. M.; McAllister, T. W.; Wu, Y.-C.; McDonald, B. C.; Broglio, S. P.; Mihalik, J. P.; Guskiewicz, K. M.; Goldman, J. T.; Jackson, J. C.; Risacher, S. L.; Saykin, A. J.; Nudelman, K. N. H.

2024-07-11 sports medicine
10.1101/2024.07.10.24309042 medRxiv
Show abstract

Identification of genetic alleles associated with both Alzheimers disease (AD) and concussion severity/recovery could help explain the association between concussion and elevated dementia risk. However, there has been little investigation into whether AD risk genes associate with concussion severity/recovery, and the limited findings are mixed. We used AD polygenic risk scores (PRS) and APOE genotypes to investigate any such associations in the NCAA-DoD Grand Alliance CARE Consortium (CARE) dataset. We assessed six outcomes in 931 total participants. The outcomes were two concussion recovery measures (number of days to asymptomatic status, number of days to return to play (RTP)) and four concussion severity measures (scores on SAC and BESS, SCAT symptom severity, and total number of symptoms). We calculated PRS using a published score [1] and performed multiple linear regression (MLR) to assess the relationship of PRS with the outcomes. We also used t-tests and chi-square tests to examine outcomes by APOE genotype, and MLR to analyze outcomes in European and African genetic ancestry subgroups. Higher PRS was associated with longer injury to RTP in the normal RTP (<24 days) subgroup (p = 0.024), and one standard deviation increase in PRS resulted in a 9.89 hour increase to the RTP interval. There were no other consistently significant effects, suggesting that high AD genetic risk is not strongly associated with more severe concussions or poor recovery in young adults. Future studies should attempt to replicate these findings in larger samples with longer follow-up using PRS calculated from diverse populations.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.