Cited by 502Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

The Mount Sinai cohort of large-scale genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic data in Alzheimer’s disease

Open access
Wang, Minghui, Beckmann, Noam D., Roussos, Panos, Wang, Erming, Zhou, Xianxiao, Wang, Qian, Ming, Chen, Neff, Ryan +21 more·2018·Scientific Data

Abstract

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) affects half the US population over the age of 85 and is universally fatal following an average course of 10 years of progressive cognitive disability. Genetic and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified about 33 risk factor genes for common, late-onset AD (LOAD), but these risk loci fail to account for the majority of affected cases and can neither provide clinically meaningful prediction of development of AD nor offer actionable mechanisms. This cohort study generated large-scale matched multi-Omics data in AD and control brains for exploring novel molecular underpinnings of AD. Specifically, we generated whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, transcriptome sequencing and proteome profiling data from multiple regions of 364 postmortem control, mild cognitive impaired (MCI) and AD brains with rich clinical and pathophysiological data. All the data went through rigorous quality control. Both the raw and processed data are publicly available through the Synapse software platform.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sdata.2018.185

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI-driven multi-omics approaches are increasingly utilized to elucidate disease-associated mechanisms, evolving from early integrative pipelines into sophisticated deep learning frameworks.

    “In particular, AI-driven multi-omics approaches are increasingly utilized to elucidate disease-associated mechanisms, evolving from early integrative pipelines into sophisticated deep learning frameworks353.”

    From Artificial intelligence-driven multi-omics approaches in Alzheimer's disease: Progress, challenges, and future directions (2025) · cites this paper as [353]

    The Usage Notes (‘Use case 3: Gene and protein integrative network analysis’; page not provided) describe growing interest in integrative network analysis of multi-omics data to identify biological processes implicated in Alzheimer’s disease. They do not describe these approaches as AI-driven or trace an evolution from early pipelines to deep learning frameworks. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The MSBB cohort includes 915 samples from four brain regions: BM10, BM22, BM36, and BM44.

    “The MSBB cohort includes 915 samples from four brain regions: the anterior prefrontal cortex (BM10), superior temporal gyrus (BM22), parahippocampal gyrus (BM36), and inferior frontal gyrus (BM44);”

    From Comprehensive characterization of the transcriptional landscape in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) brains (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Methods section, “Human brain tissue preparation” (page unavailable), identifies the four sampled regions as BM10, BM22, BM36 and BM44, with the corresponding anatomical names; it calls BM10 the frontal pole. Our copy does not substantiate the stated total of 915 samples, so the regional description is supported but the sample count is not verified. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Discrepancies in RNA-seq library preparation methods, sequencing techniques, sequencing depth, and AD definition between the MSBB and Mayo cohorts could introduce biases in data interpretation.

    “Discrepancies in RNA-seq library preparation methods, sequencing techniques, sequencing depth, and AD definition between the MSBB and Mayo cohorts could introduce biases in data interpretation (38, 39).”

    From Comprehensive characterization of the transcriptional landscape in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) brains (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Methods section describes MSBB RNA-seq library preparation and sequencing, and the Usage Notes describe how AD severity is characterized in MSBB. The cited paper does not establish differences from Mayo in those methods, sequencing depth, or AD definition, or say that such differences could bias interpretation. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The KND approach has been successfully employed to identify novel pathways and key driver genes of complex human diseases such as AD, Parkinson's disease, melanoma and gastric cancer, and the top drivers predicted for these diseases were experimentally validated in vitro or in vivo.

    “This approach has been successfully employed to identify novel pathways and key driver genes of complex human diseases such as AD [22], Parkinson’s disease (PD) [43], melanoma [44] and gastric cancer [45] and notably the top drivers predicted for the abovementioned diseases were experimentally validated in vitro or in vivo.”

    From Sex specific molecular networks and key drivers of Alzheimer’s disease (2023) · cites this paper as [22]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The two bulk RNA-seq studies used AD samples and controls from the same patient cohorts but took unique approaches for co-expression network analysis.

    “These studies both used AD samples and controls from the same patient cohorts (Religious Orders Study and Memory and Aging Project, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine),64,65,66 but they took unique approaches for co-expression network analysis.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn3159438 · DOI
  2. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn7392158 · DOI
  3. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn3157743 · DOI
  4. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn4645334 · DOI
  5. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn10901600 · DOI
  6. Synapse 2017 https://dx.doi.org/10.7303/syn5759470 · DOI
  7. Schellenberg G. D. & Montine T. J. The genetics and neuropathology of Alzheimer's disease. Acta Neuropathol 124, 305– 323 (2012). 22618995 PMC3708460
  8. Jones B. Alzheimer disease: TREM2 linked to late-onset AD. Nature Reviews Neurology 9, 5 (2012). 23208114
  9. Niemitz E. TREM2 and Alzheimer's disease. Nature Genetics 45, 11 (2012).
  10. Guerreiro R. et al. TREM2 Variants in Alzheimer's Disease. New England Journal of Medicine 368, 117– 127 (2013). 23150934 PMC3631573
  11. Jonsson T. et al. Variant of TREM2 associated with the risk of Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med 368, 107– 116 (2013). 23150908 PMC3677583
  12. Gandy S., Haroutunian V., DeKosky S. T., Sano M. & Schadt E. E. CR1 and the "vanishing amyloid" hypothesis of Alzheimer's disease. Biol Psychiatry 73, 393– 395 (2013). 23399469 PMC3600375
  13. Haroutunian V., Katsel P. & Schmeidler J. Transcriptional vulnerability of brain regions in Alzheimer's disease and dementia. Neurobiology of Aging 30, 561– 573 (2009). 17845826 PMC2746014
  14. Mirra S. S. et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD). Part II. Standardization of the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease. Neurology 41, 479– 486 (1991). 2011243
  15. Morris J. C. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 43, 2412– 2414 (1993). 8232972
  16. Wang M. et al. Integrative Network Analysis of Nineteen Brain Regions Identifies Molecular Signatures and Networks Underlying Selective Regional Vulnerability to Alzheimer's Disease. Genome medicine 8, 104 (2016). 27799057 PMC5088659
  17. Liao Y., Smyth G. K. & Shi W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923– 930 (2014). 24227677
  18. Robinson M. D., McCarthy D. J. & Smyth G. K. edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 26, 139– 140 (2010). 19910308 PMC2796818
  19. Cingolani P. et al. A program for annotating and predicting the effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms, SnpEff: SNPs in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster strain w1118; iso-2; iso-3. Fly 6, 80– 92 (2012). 22728672 PMC3679285
  20. Sherry S. T. et al. dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation. Nucleic Acids Res 29, 308– 311 (2001). 11125122 PMC29783
  21. Cooper G. M. et al. Distribution and intensity of constraint in mammalian genomic sequence. Genome Res 15, 901– 913 (2005). 15965027 PMC1172034
  22. Hubisz M. J., Pollard K. S. & Siepel A. PHAST and RPHAST: phylogenetic analysis with space/time models. Brief Bioinform 12, 41– 51 (2011). 21278375 PMC3030812
  23. Kumar P., Henikoff S. & Ng P. C. Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm. Nat Protoc 4, 1073– 1081 (2009). 19561590
  24. Consortium, E. P. The ENCODE (ENCyclopedia Of DNA Elements) Project. Science 306, 636– 640 (2004). 15499007
  25. Boyle A. P. et al. Annotation of functional variation in personal genomes using RegulomeDB. Genome Res 22, 1790– 1797 (2012). 22955989 PMC3431494
  26. Kanehisa M. The KEGG database. Novartis Foundation symposium 247, 91– 101 (2002). 12539951
  27. Seyfried N. T. et al. A Multi-network Approach Identifies Protein-Specific Co-expression in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Alzheimer's Disease. Cell systems 4, 60– 72, e64 (2017). 27989508 PMC5269514
  28. Cox J. et al. Andromeda: a peptide search engine integrated into the MaxQuant environment. Journal of proteome research 10, 1794– 1805 (2011). 21254760
  29. Carson A. R. et al. Effective filtering strategies to improve data quality from population-based whole exome sequencing studies. BMC Bioinformatics 15, 1– 15 (2014). 24884706 PMC4098776
  30. DePristo M. A. et al. A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data. Nature Genetics 43, 491 (2011). 21478889 PMC3083463
  31. Chen L. S., Wang J., Wang X. & Wang P. A mixed-effects model for incomplete data from labeling-based quantitative proteomics experiments. Ann. Appl. Stat 11, 114– 138 (2017). 29743963 PMC5937554
  32. Manichaikul A. et al. Robust relationship inference in genome-wide association studies. Bioinformatics 26, 2867– 2873 (2010). 20926424 PMC3025716
  33. Yoo S. et al. MODMatcher: Multi-Omics Data Matcher for Integrative Genomic Analysis. PLOS Computational Biology 10, e1003790 (2014). 25122495 PMC4133046
  34. Zhang B. et al. Integrated Systems Approach Identifies Genetic Nodes and Networks in Late-Onset Alzheimer’s Disease. Cell 153, 707– 720 (2013). 23622250 PMC3677161
  35. Zhang B. & Horvath S. A General Framework for Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis. Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology 4, Article 17 (2005). 16646834
  36. Song W.-M. & Zhang B. Multiscale Embedded Gene Co-expression Network Analysis. PLoS Comput Biol 11, e1004574 (2015). 26618778 PMC4664553
  37. Zhu J. et al. Increasing the Power to Detect Causal Associations by Combining Genotypic and Expression Data in Segregating Populations. PLoS Comput Biol 3, e69 (2007). 17432931 PMC1851982

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, M., Beckmann, N. D., Roussos, P., Wang, E., Zhou, X., Wang, Q., Ming, C., Neff, R., Ma, W., Fullard, J. F., Hauberg, M. E., Bendl, J., Peters, M. A., Logsdon, B., Wang, P., Mahajan, M., Mangravite, L. M., Dammer, E. B., Duong, D. M., Lah, J. J., Seyfried, N. T., Levey, A. I., Buxbaum, J. D., Ehrlich, M., Gandy, S., Katsel, P., Haroutunian, V., Schadt, E., & Zhang, B.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • James J. Peters VA Medical Center (US)
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Sage Bionetworks (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Haroutunian, Vahram
  • Schadt, Eric
  • Zhang, Bin
Venue
Scientific Data
Published
2018-09-11
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
180185-180185
ISSN
2052-4463 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2889790826
Cited by
502
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 1 · 2012: 1
Type
data paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Data (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Lundbeckfonden (R248‐2017‐2003)
  • National Institutes of Health (1s10od018522-01, HHSN271201300031C)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG057907, R01AG046170, RF1AG058469, U01AG046170, RF1AG054014, RF1AG057440, RF1AG059319, U01AG052411, R01AG050986)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (HHSN271201300031C)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, multi-omics, transcriptomics, proteomics, genomics, mild cognitive impairment, postmortem brain, late-onset Alzheimer's disease, genetic susceptibility loci
MeSH terms
Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Humans, Cohort Studies, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Proteome, Genomics, Proteomics, Genome-Wide Association Study, Transcriptome, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review