Neurodevelopment Genes Encoding Olduvai Domains Link Myalgic Encephalomyelitis to Neuropsychiatric Disorders, 2025, Lidbury et al

Nightsong

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Abstract:
Background/Objectives: The aetiology of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), a chronic and severe debilitating disease with a complex phenotype, remains elusive. Associations with infectious diseases and autoimmune and neuropsychiatric disorders have been observed, without the identification of mechanisms. Previous studies suggest that genetic predisposition plays a role, but results are difficult to replicate, with Genome-Wide Association Studies of ME/CFS being challenging due to the relative rareness and heterogeneity of the disorder.

Methods: We studied a well-defined Australian patient cohort diagnosed via the International Consensus Criteria, recruited by a specialist ME/CFS clinic. The whole-exome sequences of 77 patients were contrasted against genome variation in the 1000 Genome Project’s genome-matched population.

Results: Significant associations with ME/CFS were harboured in genes that belong to the Neuroblastoma Breakpoint Family encoding Olduvai (DUF1220) domains, namely NBPF1 (rs3897177, p-value = 3.15 × 10−8), NBPF10 (rs1553120233, p-value = 9.262 × 10−13), and NBPF16 (rs200632836, p-value = 1.04 × 10−6). Other significantly associated variants were detected in the ATR, RSPH10B,ADGRE5-CD97, and NTRK2 genes, among others. Replication of these results was attempted via a GWAS on raw data from a US cohort, which confirmed shared significant associations with variation identified in the PTPRD, CSMD3, RAPGEF5, DCC, ALDH18A1, GALNT16, UNC79, and NCOA3 genes.

Conclusions: These genes are involved in cortical neurogenesis, brain evolution, and neuroblastoma, and have been implicated by several studies in schizophrenia and autism. The sharing of these associations by the two cohorts supports their validity and grants the necessity of future studies to evaluate the implications for ME/CFS aetiology.

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/15/12/1542
 
The discussion section where they try to explain what the relevance of these genes are is quite a stretch, due to lack of primary research. (same goes with the link to neuropsychiatric disorders / autism, we simply don't know enough to say this)

I want to believe the NBPF and GO:0050773 association as a means of peripheral nerve sensitisation, but there isn't enough evidence.
 
The discussion section where they try to explain what the relevance of these genes are is quite a stretch, due to lack of primary research. (same goes with the link to neuropsychiatric disorders / autism, we simply don't know enough to say this)
Yes, I agree. The NBPF genes weren't replicated in the Nevada cohort. I think the attention should go to the genes that they say were found in both cohorts.

I think it's possible to make up all sorts of speculative stories. For example, variations in the NBPF genes have been associated with cognitive ability and IQ, as well as cognitive defects and cognitive differences. It's possible that some of the people who put themselves forward for inclusion in the Australian cohort highly value research and science, and have higher cognitive abilities than average.
 
It's possible that the people who put themselves forward for inclusion in the Australian cohort value research and science, and have higher cognitive abilities than average.

That is an excellent point and a key confounder for small convenience samples like this compared to large GWAS studies.
 
Back
Top Bottom