The GGLEAM Study: Understanding Glaucoma in the Ohio Amish International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article The GGLEAM Study: Understanding Glaucoma in the Ohio Amish Andrea R. Waksmunski 1,2 , Yeunjoo E. Song 1, Tyler G. Kinzy 1 , Reneé A. Laux 1, Jane Sewell 1, Denise Fuzzell 1, Sarada Fuzzell 1, Sherri Miller 1, Janey L. Wiggs 3, Louis R. Pasquale 4 , Jonathan M. Skarie 1,5, Jonathan L. Haines 1,2 and Jessica N. Cooke Bailey 1,2,* ���������� ������� Citation: Waksmunski, A.R.; Song, Y.E.; Kinzy, T.G.; Laux, R.A.; Sewell, J.; Fuzzell, D.; Fuzzell, S.; Miller, S.; Wiggs, J.L.; Pasquale, L.R.; et al. The GGLEAM Study: Understanding Glaucoma in the Ohio Amish. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph18041551 Academic Editor: Paul B. Tchounwou Received: 23 December 2020 Accepted: 3 February 2021 Published: 6 February 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1 Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA; axw360@case.edu (A.R.W.); yeunjoo.song@case.edu (Y.E.S.); tgk18@case.edu (T.G.K.); ral119@case.edu (R.A.L.); jls288@case.edu (J.S.); mxf300@case.edu (D.F.); slf74@case.edu (S.F.); sdm120@case.edu (S.M.); jskarie23@gmail.com (J.M.S.); jlh213@case.edu (J.L.H.) 2 Cleveland Institute for Computational Biology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA 3 Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA 02114, USA; janey_wiggs@meei.harvard.edu 4 Department of Ophthalmology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; louis.pasquale@gmail.com 5 Ohio Eye Associates, Mansfield, OH 44906, USA * Correspondence: jnc43@case.edu Abstract: Glaucoma leads to millions of cases of visual impairment and blindness around the world. Its susceptibility is shaped by both environmental and genetic risk factors. Although over 120 risk loci have been identified for glaucoma, a large portion of its heritability is still unexplained. Here we describe the foundation of the Genetics of GLaucoma Evaluation in the AMish (GGLEAM) study to investigate the genetic architecture of glaucoma in the Ohio Amish, which exhibits lower genetic and environmental heterogeneity compared to the general population. To date, we have enrolled 81 Amish individuals in our study from Holmes County, Ohio. As a part of our enrollment process, 62 GGLEAM study participants (42 glaucoma-affected and 20 unaffected individuals) received comprehensive eye examinations and glaucoma evaluations. Using the data from the Anabaptist Genealogy Database, we found that 80 of the GGLEAM study participants were related to one another through a large, multigenerational pedigree containing 1586 people. We plan to integrate the health and kinship data obtained for the GGLEAM study to interrogate glaucoma genetics and pathophysiology in this unique population. Keywords: glaucoma; vision; endophenotype; family history; founder population; Amish 1. Introduction Vision loss is a significant public health concern that is worsening with the increasing size of the elderly population [1]. Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness with about 64 million individuals affected around the world [2]. This complex phenotype is considered a collection of disorders characterized by the progressive loss of peripheral vision resulting from degeneration of the optic nerve [3]. While there are early-onset forms of glaucoma, the most common type of glaucoma, primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), manifests in adulthood and has a complex pattern of inheritance [4]. POAG is a multi- factorial condition with both genetic and environmental risk factors [5–7]. Genome-wide association studies of large cohorts of unrelated individuals have identified 127 loci associ- ated with POAG risk as well as many loci associated with quantitative POAG traits called endophenotypes like intraocular pressure (IOP) and optic disc parameters [8–16]. However, genetic variation in these loci only accounts for less than 10% of POAG heritability [8,16]. Therefore, a substantial portion of POAG heritability remains unexplained [17]. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041551 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph https://www.mdpi.com https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7223-7371 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4314-9791 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5835-3496 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4001-8702 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041551 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041551 https://creativecommons.org/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041551 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1551?type=check_update&version=1 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 2 of 13 Previous studies have shown the utility of working with founder populations and population isolates to elucidate genetic variation for glaucoma [18–25] and other age- related ocular traits [26–29]. The Amish comprise an isolated, founder population that is culturally and genetically segregated from the general population of European descent [30]. They typically practice a conservative, uniform lifestyle that includes similar dietary habits, occupations, and physical activity as well as minimal smoking [31]. Nearly all present-day Amish are descendants of a few hundred Swiss–German Anabaptists who emigrated to the United States to escape religious persecution in Europe in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries [32,33]. The resettlement of these individuals in North America resulted in a population bottleneck that has been sustained across generations because Amish typically marry within their faith group and non-Amish individuals rarely join the Amish community [34]. Therefore, the Amish are a valued population in genetics research due to their relatively homogeneous environments and their reduced genetic variation due to their founder event and consanguinity [35]. Our multidisciplinary team set out to establish the Genetics of GLaucoma Evaluation in the AMish (GGLEAM) study to understand the prevalence and risk factors of glaucoma in Amish communities in Ohio. This represents a previously unexplored area in genetics research, especially given that the incidence of common, age-related forms of glaucoma are unknown in the Amish. Furthermore, we hypothesize that studying a complex ocular disease like glaucoma in a genetically and environmentally homogeneous population, like the Amish, will facilitate the discovery of novel loci associated with glaucoma and its endophenotypes and aid in our understanding of its pathophysiology. This work also highlights the importance of establishing a working relationship with study participants in biomedical research, especially those from special populations. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Study Participants The participants in the Genetics of GLaucoma Evaluation in the AMish (GGLEAM) study are Amish individuals living in and around Holmes County, Ohio. The Holmes County, Ohio Amish community comprises one of the largest Amish settlements in North America [36]. It began in 1809 when Amish settlers moved there from Somerset County, Pennsylvania [37]. Our initial contacts with this community were made over twenty years ago through advertising in the local Amish papers and meeting with community lead- ers to establish a working relationship with the Amish community in Holmes County as previously described [38–46]. Due to their lifestyle, Amish abstain from using mod- ern technology in their homes [30,33]; therefore, study participants were recruited for this study using door-to-door methods and through advertisements in local newspapers. The recruitment for our GGLEAM study branched from the ongoing Amish Eye Study, which recruited Amish individuals from Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania to interrogate age-related macular degeneration (AMD) genetics and identify possible biomarkers for AMD from optical coherence tomography (OCT) [46]. In that study, some participants self-reported prior glaucoma diagnoses, and we found that all the self-reported glaucoma diagnoses were clinically confirmed (positive predictive value: 100%). These observations inspired us to increase our engagement with the Amish in Holmes County, Ohio and launch the GGLEAM study to focus on glaucoma in this population. The GGLEAM study enrollment process was comprised of two visits with partici- pants. In the first visit, the study coordinator consented the study participants in their homes, and study participants completed health and family medical history questionnaires (Supplementary Materials), which were based on the questionnaires developed for the Collaborative Amish Aging and Memory Project (NIH grants AG058066 and AG019085) and the Amish Eye Study (NIH grant EY023164). The second visit occurred at the Ohio Eye Associates office in Mansfield, Ohio at which the participant received a comprehensive eye examination performed by a fellowship-trained MD glaucoma specialist. During this visit, a blood sample was also drawn by the study coordinator for DNA extraction and biomarker Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 3 of 13 analysis. The examination included visual acuity assessment by Snellen eye chart, auto- mated 24-2 Humphrey visual field testing (Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany), stereo optic disc photography, optical coherence tomography assessment of the optic disc, retinal nerve fiber layer and ganglion cell complex (Cirrus SD-OCT, Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany), gonioscopy, central corneal thickness measurement by Pachmate 2 (DGH Technology, Inc., Exton, PA, USA), assessment of corneal hysteresis via the Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert Technologies, Buffalo, NY, USA), intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement with Goldman applanation tonometry, detailed slit lamp biomicroscopy, and fundus exam via indirect ophthalmoscopy following pupil dilation. Glaucoma diagnoses were defined by current American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Guidelines [47,48]. Briefly, glaucoma determination was based on IOP measurements taking into account corneal thickness and hysteresis as well as optic nerve examination, visual field testing, and assessment of the retinal nerve fiber layer and ganglion cell layer complex. Individuals were invited to participate in the study if they met one of the following criteria: (i) reported to have or were diagnosed with any type of glaucoma; (ii) were at least 40 years old and did not have glaucoma; or (iii) had family members with glaucoma. Individuals under 40 without a prior diagnosis of glaucoma or family history of glaucoma were not invited to participate in the study. All study participants provided informed consent, and the study was conducted within the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board at Case Western Reserve University (IRB-2017-2067). 2.2. Amish Pedigree The Amish are a culturally isolated population with extensive genealogical records dating back to their emigration to North America [49]. Community-based directories and research-based resources, described elsewhere, have been developed to curate these data [50]. To determine the relatedness of the GGLEAM study participants, we queried the Anabaptist Genealogy Database (AGDB) [51]. Based on these pedigree data, we constructed an all-connecting path pedigree (ACP) to depict all known familial relationships among study participants and their ancestors. The ACP was drawn using the Pedigraph software tool [52]. Kinship and inbreeding coefficients were calculated using KinInbcoef software and genealogical information from the all-connecting path pedigree [53]. 3. Results 3.1. GGLEAM Study Participants Thus far, we have enrolled 81 study participants from the Amish community in and near Holmes County, Ohio. Of these individuals, we have obtained phenotypic data from comprehensive eye exams and health questionnaires for 62 individuals to date. A fellowship-trained MD glaucoma specialist determined glaucoma type and severity based on the results of each individual’s comprehensive glaucoma examination and testing results. Most of the glaucoma-affected study participants (88%) have primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) (Table 1). On average, individuals with glaucoma were older than individuals without glaucoma (67.6 years old and 56.95 years, respectively) (Table 1). 3.2. Family History of Glaucoma Family history is a well-established risk factor for glaucoma [4,54–56]. Individuals who have first-degree relatives with glaucoma have a 10-fold higher risk of developing glaucoma compared to individuals without glaucoma-affected first-degree relatives [57]. We enrolled study participants based on their self-reported or clinically confirmed diagnosis of glau- coma as well as their self-reported family history of glaucoma. Specifically, we asked study participants if they had a family history of glaucoma in first-degree relatives or extended family members. As a consequence of the interrelatedness and close-knit nature of this population, several of the study participants were from the same Amish nuclear families. We found that about 66% of the GGLEAM study participants had first-degree Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 4 of 13 relatives with glaucoma (Table 2). Of the 42 glaucoma-affected Amish individuals in our study, 80.95% had first-degree relatives affected by glaucoma, and 69.05% had extended family members with glaucoma (Table 2). Most of the unaffected individuals in this study reported that they did not have a family history of glaucoma (Table 2). Table 1. Features of Genetics of GLaucoma Evaluation in the AMish (GGLEAM) Study Participants. Of the 42 glaucoma-affected Amish in this study, 37 individuals have POAG and 5 have another form of glaucoma including 1 person with chronic angle closure glaucoma and 4 individuals with pigmentary glaucoma. Age values represent the study participants’ ages at their eye exams. The age range for study participants with glaucoma was 40–85, and the age range for unaffected individuals was 42–81. Affected Unaffected N 42 20 Age Mean ± SD 67.60 ± 11.39 56.95 ± 10.33 Sex Male 19 7 Female 23 13 Table 2. Family history of glaucoma in GGLEAM study participants. First-degree relatives include parents and siblings. Extended family includes aunts, uncles, and cousins. Family History of Glaucoma Affected (%) Unaffected (%) All (%) First-Degree Relatives No 8 (19.05) 13 (65) 21 (33.87) Yes 34 (80.95) 7 (35) 41 (66.13) Extended Family Unknown 1 (2.38) 1 (5) 2 (3.23) No 12 (28.57) 14 (70) 26 (41.94) Yes 29 (69.05) 5 (25) 34 (54.84) 3.3. Quantitative Ocular Measurements The majority of the GGLEAM study participants (n = 62) underwent comprehensive eye exams that yielded various quantitative ocular measures for 42 glaucoma-affected individuals and 20 unaffected individuals (Table 3). This includes quantitative ocular mea- surements for 37 POAG-affected individuals (Table 4). Sixteen of the glaucoma-affected study participants either received IOP lowering medications (i.e., prostaglandin analogs, beta-blockers, alpha agonists, oral carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, topical carbonic anhy- drase inhibitors, or cholinergic agents) or had prior surgery (i.e., glaucoma filtering surgery, laser iridotomy, argon laser trabeculoplasty, selective laser trabeculoplasty, or minimally invasive glaucoma surgery). Average IOP was higher among individuals with glaucoma (i.e., average IOP: 15 mmHg) compared to individuals without glaucoma (average IOP: 14 mmHg) (Table 3). The average IOP in study participants with POAG was about 15 mmHg (Table 4). The average vertical cup-to-disc ratio (VCDR) was over 1.6 times higher in glaucoma-affected individuals (OD VCDR: 0.62 ± 0.12, OS VCDR: 0.66 ± 0.12) com- pared to unaffected individuals (OD VCDR: 0.38 ± 0.15; OS VCDR: 0.37 ± 0.16) (Table 3). The average VCDR in the right and left eyes of POAG-affected individuals were 0.63 and 0.66, respectively (Table 4). Although the average refractive error for individuals without glaucoma was substantially lower than for study participants with glaucoma, the ranges of values observed for both groups overlapped (Table 3). The mean central corneal thickness (CCT) was lower in glaucoma-affected individuals compared to unaffected individuals (Table 3). The average CCT for POAG-affected individuals was also lower than the aver- age CCT observed in unaffected individuals (Tables 3 and 4). Average axial length was nearly the same in glaucoma-affected individuals compared to unaffected individuals (Tables 3 and 4). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 5 of 13 Table 3. Quantitative eye measurements. Measurements were obtained from eye exams performed at the Ohio Eye Associates office. These data were obtained for 42 glaucoma-affected study participants and 20 unaffected individuals. IOP: intraocular pressure. VCDR: vertical cup-to-disc ratio. OD: oculus dexter (right eye). OS: oculus sinister (left eye). Refractive error: Spherical equivalent from distance refraction. D: diopters. Affected Unaffected Average ± SD (Range) Average ± SD (Range) OD IOP (mmHg) 15.1 ± 4.0 (3–22) 13.5 ± 2.8 (8–19) OS IOP (mmHg) 15.4 ± 3.7 (9–22) 13.8 ± 3.1 (8–21) OD VCDR 0.62 ± 0.12 (0.30–0.90) 0.38 ± 0.15 (0.10–0.64) OS VCDR 0.66 ± 0.12 (0.40–0.90) 0.37 ± 0.16 (0.06–0.62) OD Refractive error (D) 0.59 ± 1.55 (−4.00, +4.50) −0.17 ± 2.34 (−6.00, +3.25) OS Refractive error (D) 0.49 ± 1.54 (−3.00, +5.00) −0.21 ± 2.32 (−6.50, +3.00) OD CCT (Microns) 549 ± 43 (440–658) 559 ± 29 (516–606) OS CCT (Microns) 547 ± 42 (466–638) 564 ± 34 (514–627) OD Axial Length * (mm) 23.70 ± 0.86 (22.02–25.47) 23.71 ± 1.13 (21.58–26.30) OS Axial Length * (mm) 23.60 ± 0.85 (21.86–25.20) 23.58 ± 1.10 (21.59–25.98) * These values were calculated based on measurements from 33 glaucoma-affected individuals and 20 controls. 3.4. Genealogy of GGLEAM Study Participants The Amish represent a unique population in genetics research due to their recent founding event and the extensive genealogical records available for this community [32,35,51,58]. One of these resources includes the Anabaptist Genealogy Database (AGDB) [51,59]. We queried the AGDB and found that 80 of the 81 GGLEAM study participants are re- lated to one another through a 1586-person all-connecting path (ACP) pedigree (Figure 1). One individual enrolled in this study only had parental information in the AGDB and could not be connected to the pedigree. Kinship coefficients were calculated among the 80 connected GGLEAM study participants using KinInbcoef [53]. The average kinship coefficient among these study participants was 0.023 (SEM: 0.00064). The maximum kinship coefficient observed was 0.273, and the minimum was 0.00257. The average inbreeding coefficient calculated by KinInbcoef was 0.014 (SEM: 0.000747). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 6 of 13 Table 4. Quantitative eye measurements for POAG-affected GGLEAM study participants. Measure- ments were obtained from eye exams performed at the Ohio Eye Associates office for 37 POAG- affected individuals. IOP: intraocular pressure. VCDR: vertical cup-to-disc ratio. OD: oculus dexter (right eye). OS: oculus sinister (left eye). Refractive error: Spherical equivalent from distance refraction. D: diopters. POAG Average ± SD (Range) OD IOP (mmHg) 15.0 ± 4.2 (3–22) OS IOP (mmHg) 15.1 ± 3.6 (9–22) OD VCDR 0.63 ± 0.11 (0.30–0.85) OS VCDR 0.66 ± 0.11 (0.40–0.90) OD Refractive error (D) 0.56 ± 1.59 (−4.00, +4.50) OS Refractive error (D) 0.53 ± 1.57 (−3.00, +5.00) OD CCT (Microns) 547 ± 43 (440–658) OS CCT (Microns) 545 ± 42 (466–638) OD Axial Length * (mm) 23.66 ± 0.88 (22.02–25.47) OS Axial Length * (mm) 23.55 ± 0.84 (21.86–25.09) * These values were calculated based on measurements from 29 individuals with POAG. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14 Figure 1. All-connecting path pedigree of GGLEAM study participants. This multigenerational pedigree connects 80 of the 81 Amish individuals enrolled in the GGLEAM study and includes 1586 individuals. Genealogy data was obtained from the Anabaptist Genealogy Database (AGDB) [43]. The 80 GGLEAM study participants are highlighted in blue. Men are represented by squares, and females are represented by circles. Pedigree was drawn using the Pedigraph software tool. Figure 1. All-connecting path pedigree of GGLEAM study participants. This multigenerational pedigree connects 80 of the 81 Amish individuals enrolled in the GGLEAM study and includes 1586 individuals. Genealogy data was obtained from the Anabaptist Genealogy Database (AGDB) [43]. The 80 GGLEAM study participants are highlighted in blue. Men are represented by squares, and females are represented by circles. Pedigree was drawn using the Pedigraph software tool. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 7 of 13 4. Discussion Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness, but its genetic architecture and disease etiology are not fully understood. We established the GGLEAM study to under- stand glaucoma risk in the Ohio Amish, which are a population isolate. While previous studies in the Amish examined congenital glaucoma [60] or described glaucoma as a clinical feature in a few individuals with a homozygous mutation in the SAMHD1 gene associated with cerebral vasculopathy and early onset stroke [61], glaucoma risk and prevalence have not been extensively studied in the Amish population. Therefore, this study can provide the foundation for future work assessing glaucoma risk in this population, which could inform understanding of glaucoma risk in general. To date, we have enrolled 81 Amish individuals from in and around Holmes County, Ohio, and 62 of these study participants have received comprehensive eye exams. Moving forward, we plan to enroll additional Ohio Amish community members in our study and obtain data from glaucoma-specific eye exams for all of the GGLEAM study participants. Because our study design includes obtaining glaucoma status and quantitative eye measurements of the GGLEAM study participants, we can study the genetic variation potentially associated with glaucoma and its endophenotypes. Examining heritable en- dophenotypes such as IOP and VCDR rather than disease status alone increases the sta- tistical power to detect associated loci for a heterogeneous phenotype like glaucoma [18]. Identifying genetic variants associated with these glaucoma-related traits may improve our understanding of glaucoma development and disease pathophysiology [62]. Additionally, studying a complex trait like glaucoma in an isolated, founder population like the Amish may allow for the identification of novel genetic variants that have been indiscernible from previous genetics studies in large datasets of unrelated individuals due to low minor allele frequency (MAF) [17]. In traditional case-control genome-wide association stud- ies, the sample size needed to detect trait-associated variants increases with 1/MAF [17]. Therefore, sample sizes in these population-based cohorts are in the tens of thousands. By comparison, association studies of rare variants in families require lower sample sizes if disease-associated variants are present since they are likely to be inherited by other family members [63]. This aspect of family-based study designs is augmented in studies with pop- ulation isolates, which can have densely affected families with potentially causal variants inherited identical-by-descent from a small set of common ancestors [34,64]. The Amish resettlement in North America and generations of intra-faith marriages has resulted in the accumulation of alleles that are rare in the general population of European descent. The all-connecting path pedigree we constructed for the GGLEAM study participants using data from the AGDB [51] confirmed that we are effectively working with one large family, which will greatly aid in future genetics studies of this cohort. Furthermore, the av- erage kinship and inbreeding coefficients we calculated for these individuals were 0.023 and 0.014, respectively. The estimated inbreeding coefficient for the Amish population, in general, is 0.0151 [65]. The average kinship coefficient previously calculated for Amish families in Ohio and Indiana was 0.019 [41]. Leveraging kinship information enables us to account for familial relationships among study participants, which are highly inter- connected due to generations of endogamy in the population [35]. We can then utilize this information in family-based association tests between glaucoma affection status and SNP genotype to identify novel glaucoma risk variants or in gene-set methods (i.e., kernel, burden, and collapsing methods) to identify rare variants for glaucoma [17,66–68]. In addition to being genetically homogeneous as a result of their recent popula- tion bottleneck and generations of intra-faith marriages, the Amish adhere to a con- servative lifestyle that is mostly consistent across Amish communities, which are pre- dominantly in rural areas [35]. Therefore, environmental exposures, modifiable health behaviors, and lifestyle factors are more homogeneous in the Ohio Amish compared to the general population of European descent. These features of the Amish popu- lation make them a valued population to investigate both genetic and environmental risk factors for glaucoma as well as the possible interactions among these risk factors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 8 of 13 Through health, physical activity, environmental exposure, and family history question- naires in the GGLEAM study (Supplementary Materials), we aim to investigate non-genetic factors pertaining to glaucoma risk in this population. We are especially interested in factors that have been inconsistently associated with glaucoma risk and development, including diet, physical activity, caffeine consumption, smoking, and alcohol consump- tion [69–71]. As a part of their cultural traditions, the Amish generally do not use motorized vehicles; therefore, they have higher activity levels than non-Amish individuals [30,72]. Most Amish community members consume a similar diet that consists of foods that are rich in carbohydrates and lipids as well as homegrown fruits and vegetables [73]. They also typ- ically abstain from smoking and consuming alcoholic beverages [73,74]. All 62 GGLEAM study participants who completed our questionnaires stated that they had never smoked, and only one individual self-reported alcohol consumption. Therefore, our GGLEAM study is well-positioned to assess the contributions of risk factors like physical activity, diet, and caffeine consumption in a uniquely homogeneous population that generally prohibits smoking and alcohol consumption. Increased knowledge of the effects and interplay of genetic and environmental risk factors may broaden our understanding of glaucoma patho- physiology, facilitate earlier disease detection based on more comprehensive risk profiles, and inspire the development of novel therapeutics to treat glaucoma. Amish communities in North America have been engaged in genetics research since the 1960s [35,58]. These early efforts led to better understanding of various Mendelian genetic disorders [33], and several studies have also shown the utility of studying com- plex traits in Amish families due to their reduced heterogeneity in genetic variation and environmental exposures [17,26,28,29,38–46,75–95]. Initial research efforts with Amish communities involved collaboration among researchers and local Amish liaisons who were familiar with the families in the community, could speak Pennsylvania Dutch, and under- stood the customs and values of the Amish [58]. Some of these practices were continued as more research teams began working with the Amish population, including the Amish Research Program [96–98] and the Amish Eye Study [46]. The factors most valued by the Amish include faith, family, and community [36,58]. Their participation in research has partially been shaped by their altruistic nature and their belief that, by participating in these studies, they are helping others [97]. To ensure that our study design and enrollment practices were respectful of these values, we engaged in door-to-door recruitment methods, performed study enrollments in the study participants’ homes, and used paper questionnaires to generate some of our study data. Our study coordinators also built rapport with the GGLEAM study participants from engagement in prior research studies and years of community involvement [26,46]. With the growing field of genomics research in diverse and understudied populations, it is paramount that researchers form longitudinal partnerships with study participants, especially those from vulnerable populations [99,100]. 5. Conclusions Glaucoma significantly contributes to global cases of vision loss and blindness. While large population-based cohorts have successfully identified numerous loci contributing to glau- coma risk, most of the additive genetic variance for glaucoma is not attributable to known loci. We started the GGLEAM study to study glaucoma risk in the Amish population by ascertaining individuals with and without glaucoma from in and around Holmes County, Ohio. To date, 81 Amish individuals have been enrolled in this study, and phenotypic data has been generated for 62 of these individuals through health, lifestyle, environmental exposure, and family history questionnaires as well as comprehensive eye exams. We de- termined that these study participants are highly interrelated through a multigenerational pedigree and plan to incorporate this kinship information into our future genetics studies. Our hope is that the health, phenotypic, and genetic data we are gathering, together with the extensive genealogical records for this special population, will be invaluable in expand- ing our understanding of the genetic epidemiology of glaucoma. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 9 of 13 Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/1660-460 1/18/4/1551/s1, Supplementary Item 1: GGLEAM study questionnaire for family history of eye disease, Supplementary Item 2: Questionnaire for GGLEAM study participants’ physical activity and environmental exposure, and Supplementary Item 3: Questionnaire for GGLEAM study participants’ health and activities. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.N.C.B., J.M.S., J.L.H., J.L.W. and L.R.P.; Methodology, J.N.C.B., J.M.S. and J.L.H.; Formal Analysis, A.R.W., Y.E.S. and T.G.K.; Data Curation, A.R.W., Y.E.S., T.G.K., J.S., D.F., S.F. and S.M.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, A.R.W.; Writing—Review and Editing, A.R.W., T.G.K., J.L.W., L.R.P., J.M.S., J.L.H. and J.N.C.B.; Visualization, A.R.W.; Supervision, J.N.C.B. and J.L.H.; Project Administration, R.A.L.; Funding Acquisition, A.R.W., J.L.W., L.R.P., J.M.S., J.L.H. and J.N.C.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This work was supported by the BrightFocus Foundation (G2018042) and the Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of Cleveland (KL2TR002547) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This work also received support from the following grants through the NIH: AG58066 and EY023164. A.R.W. received support from the postdoctoral NIH Visual Sciences Training Program at Case Western Reserve University (T32 EY 7157-19). L.R.P. received support from EY015473. Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Case Western Reserve University (IRB-2017-2067). Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Data Availability Statement: Deidentified data are, in principle, available to qualified investigators once institutional agreements have been reached. Acknowledgments: We would like to thank the Amish families in Holmes County, Ohio for their participation and contributions to this research study. We also appreciate the data contribution from the Anabaptist Genealogy Database (AGDB). This work made use of the High Performance Computing Resource in the Core Facility for Advanced Research Computing at Case Western Reserve University. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1. World Health Organization. World Report on Vision; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzarland, 2019. 2. Tham, Y.C.; Li, X.; Wong, T.Y.; Quigley, H.A.; Aung, T.; Cheng, C.Y. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2014, 121, 2081–2090. [CrossRef] 3. Quigley, H.A.; Broman, A.T. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006, 90, 262–267. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 4. Wiggs, J.L.; Pasquale, L.R. Genetics of glaucoma. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2017, 26, R21–R27. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 5. Doucette, L.P.; Rasnitsyn, A.; Seifi, M.; Walter, M.A. The interactions of genes, age, and environment in glaucoma pathogenesis. Surv. Ophthalmol. 2015, 60, 310–326. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 6. Trivli, A.; Zervou, M.I.; Goulielmos, G.N.; Spandidos, D.A.; Detorakis, E.T. Primary open angle glaucoma genetics: The common variants and their clinical associations. Mol. Med. Rep. 2020, 22, 1103–1110. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 7. Janssen, S.F.; Gorgels, T.G.; Ramdas, W.D.; Klaver, C.C.; van Duijn, C.M.; Jansonius, N.M.; Bergen, A.A. The vast complexity of primary open angle glaucoma: Disease genes, risks, molecular mechanisms and pathobiology. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 2013, 37, 31–67. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 8. Choquet, H.; Wiggs, J.L.; Khawaja, A.P. Clinical implications of recent advances in primary open-angle glaucoma genetics. Eye (London) 2020, 34, 29–39. [CrossRef] 9. MacGregor, S.; Ong, J.S.; An, J.; Han, X.; Zhou, T.; Siggs, O.M.; Law, M.H.; Souzeau, E.; Sharma, S.; Lynn, D.J.; et al. Genome-wide association study of intraocular pressure uncovers new pathways to glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 2018, 50, 1067–1071. [CrossRef] 10. Choquet, H.; Thai, K.K.; Yin, J.; Hoffmann, T.J.; Kvale, M.N.; Banda, Y.; Schaefer, C.; Risch, N.; Nair, K.S.; Melles, R.; et al. A large multi-ethnic genome-wide association study identifies novel genetic loci for intraocular pressure. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 2108. [CrossRef] 11. Hysi, P.G.; Cheng, C.Y.; Springelkamp, H.; Macgregor, S.; Bailey, J.N.C.; Wojciechowski, R.; Vitart, V.; Nag, A.; Hewitt, A.W.; Hohn, R.; et al. Genome-wide analysis of multi-ancestry cohorts identifies new loci influencing intraocular pressure and susceptibility to glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 2014, 46, 1126–1130. [CrossRef] https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1551/s1 https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1551/s1 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013 http://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.081224 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16488940 http://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddx184 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28505344 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2015.01.004 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25907525 http://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2020.11215 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32626970 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2013.09.001 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24055863 http://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-019-0632-7 http://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0176-y http://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01913-6 http://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3087 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 10 of 13 12. Springelkamp, H.; Hohn, R.; Mishra, A.; Hysi, P.G.; Khor, C.C.; Loomis, S.J.; Bailey, J.N.; Gibson, J.; Thorleifsson, G.; Janssen, S.F.; et al. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies identifies novel loci that influence cupping and the glaucomatous process. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 4883. [CrossRef] 13. Springelkamp, H.; Iglesias, A.I.; Mishra, A.; Hohn, R.; Wojciechowski, R.; Khawaja, A.P.; Nag, A.; Wang, Y.X.; Wang, J.J.; Cuellar-Partida, G.; et al. New insights into the genetics of primary open-angle glaucoma based on meta-analyses of intraocular pressure and optic disc characteristics. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2017, 26, 438–453. [CrossRef] 14. Khawaja, A.P.; Bailey, J.N.C.; Wareham, N.J.; Scott, R.A.; Simcoe, M.; Igo, R.P.; Song, Y.E.; Wojciechowski, R.; Cheng, C.Y.; Khaw, P.T.; et al. Genome-wide analyses identify 68 new loci associated with intraocular pressure and improve risk prediction for primary open-angle glaucoma. Nat. Genet. 2018, 50, 778–782. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 15. Charlesworth, J.; Kramer, P.L.; Dyer, T.; Diego, V.; Samples, J.R.; Craig, J.E.; Mackey, D.A.; Hewitt, A.W.; Blangero, J.; Wirtz, M.K. The path to open-angle glaucoma gene discovery: Endophenotypic status of intraocular pressure, cup-to-disc ratio, and central corneal thickness. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010, 51, 3509–3514. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 16. Gharahkhani, P.; Jorgenson, E.; Hysi, P.; Khawaja, A.P.; Pendergrass, S.; Han, X.; Ong, J.S.; Hewitt, A.W.; Segre, A.; Igo, R.P.; et al. A large cross-ancestry meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies identifies 127 risk loci for primary open-angle glaucoma, with most loci showing consistent effects across ancestries. Nat. Commun. 2020, in press. 17. Manolio, T.A.; Collins, F.S.; Cox, N.J.; Goldstein, D.B.; Hindorff, L.A.; Hunter, D.J.; McCarthy, M.I.; Ramos, E.M.; Cardon, L.R.; Chakravarti, A.; et al. Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases. Nature 2009, 461, 747–753. [CrossRef] 18. Matovinovic, E.; Kho, P.F.; Lea, R.A.; Benton, M.C.; Eccles, D.A.; Haupt, L.M.; Hewitt, A.W.; Sherwin, J.C.; Mackey, D.A.; Griffiths, L.R. Genome-wide linkage and association analysis of primary open-angle glaucoma endophenotypes in the Norfolk Island isolate. Mol. Vis. 2017, 23, 660–665. 19. van Koolwijk, L.M.; Despriet, D.D.; van Duijn, C.M.; Cortes, L.M.P.; Vingerling, J.R.; Aulchenko, Y.S.; Oostra, B.A.; Klaver, C.C.; Lemij, H.G. Genetic contributions to glaucoma: Heritability of intraocular pressure, retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, and optic disc morphology. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007, 48, 3669–3676. [CrossRef] 20. Lee, M.K.; Woo, S.J.; Kim, J.I.; Cho, S.I.; Kim, H.; Sung, J.; Seo, J.S.; Kim, D.M. Replication of a glaucoma candidate gene on 5q22.1 for intraocular pressure in mongolian populations: The GENDISCAN Project. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010, 51, 1335–1340. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 21. Kitsos, G.; Petrou, Z.; Grigoriadou, M.; Samples, J.R.; Hewitt, A.W.; Kokotas, H.; Giannoulia-Karantana, A.; Mackey, D.A.; Wirtz, M.K.; Moschou, M.; et al. Primary open angle glaucoma due to T377M MYOC: Population mapping of a Greek founder mutation in Northwestern Greece. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2010, 4, 171–178. [CrossRef] 22. Faucher, M.; Anctil, J.L.; Rodrigue, M.A.; Duchesne, A.; Bergeron, D.; Blondeau, P.; Cote, G.; Dubois, S.; Bergeron, J.; Arseneault, R.; et al. Founder TIGR/myocilin mutations for glaucoma in the Quebec population. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2002, 11, 2077–2090. [CrossRef] 23. Karunaratne, V.K.K. Quantitative Traits Related to Primary Open Angle Glaucoma in the Scottish Population Isolate of Orkney; University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh, UK, 2012. 24. Axenovich, T.; Zorkoltseva, I.; Belonogova, N.; van Koolwijk, L.M.; Borodin, P.; Kirichenko, A.; Babenko, V.; Ramdas, W.D.; Amin, N.; Despriet, D.D.; et al. Linkage and association analyses of glaucoma related traits in a large pedigree from a Dutch genetically isolated population. J. Med. Genet. 2011, 48, 802–809. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 25. Tanigawa, Y.; Wainberg, M.; Karjalainen, J.; Kiiskinen, T.; Venkataraman, G.; Lemmela, S.; Turunen, J.A.; Graham, R.R.; Havulinna, A.S.; Perola, M.; et al. Rare protein-altering variants in ANGPTL7 lower intraocular pressure and protect against glaucoma. PLoS Genet. 2020, 16, e1008682. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 26. Hoffman, J.D.; Cooke Bailey, J.N.; D’Aoust, L.; Cade, W.; Ayala-Haedo, J.; Fuzzell, D.; Laux, R.; Adams, L.D.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; Caywood, L.; et al. Rare complement factor H variant associated with age-related macular degeneration in the Amish. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014, 55, 4455–4460. [CrossRef] 27. Nittala, M.G.; Velaga, S.B.; Hariri, A.; Pfau, M.; Birch, D.G.; Haines, J.; Pericak-Vance, M.A.; Stambolian, D.; Sadda, S.R. Retinal Sensitivity Using Microperimetry in Age-Related Macular Degeneration in an Amish Population. Ophthalmic Surg. Lasers Imaging Retin. 2019, 50, e236–e241. [CrossRef] 28. Sardell, R.J.; Nittala, M.G.; Adams, L.D.; Laux, R.A.; Bailey, J.N.C.; Fuzzell, D.; Fuzzell, S.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; Caywood, L.J.; Horst, V.; et al. Heritability of Choroidal Thickness in the Amish. Ophthalmology 2016, 123, 2537–2544. [CrossRef] 29. Waksmunski, A.R.; Igo, R.P., Jr.; Song, Y.E.; Cooke Bailey, J.N.; Laux, R.; Fuzzell, D.; Fuzzell, S.; Adams, L.D.; Caywood, L.; Prough, M.; et al. Rare variants and loci for age-related macular degeneration in the Ohio and Indiana Amish. Hum. Genet. 2019, 138, 1171–1182. [CrossRef] 30. Kraybill, D.B.; Johnson-Weiner, K.M.; Nolt, S.M. The Amish; Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2013. 31. Mitchell, B.D.; McArdle, P.F.; Shen, H.; Rampersaud, E.; Pollin, T.I.; Bielak, L.F.; Jaquish, C.; Douglas, J.A.; Roy-Gagnon, M.H.; Sack, P.; et al. The genetic response to short-term interventions affecting cardiovascular function: Rationale and design of the Heredity and Phenotype Intervention (HAPI) Heart Study. Am. Heart J. 2008, 155, 823–828. [CrossRef] 32. Cross, H.E.; Crosby, A.H. Amish Contributions to Medical Genetics. Mennon. Q. Rev. 2008, 82, 449–467. 33. Strauss, K.A.; Puffenberger, E.G. Genetics, medicine, and the Plain people. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 2009, 10, 513–536. [CrossRef] http://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5883 http://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddw399 http://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0126-8 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29785010 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.09-4786 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20237253 http://doi.org/10.1038/nature08494 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.06-1519 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.09-3979 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19875670 http://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S8974 http://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/11.18.2077 http://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2011-100436 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22058429 http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008682 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32369491 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-13684 http://doi.org/10.3928/23258160-20190905-15 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.09.001 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-019-02050-4 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2008.01.019 http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-082908-150040 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 11 of 13 34. Hatzikotoulas, K.; Gilly, A.; Zeggini, E. Using population isolates in genetic association studies. Brief. Funct. Genom. 2014, 13, 371–377. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 35. McKusick, V.A.; Hostetler, J.A.; Egeland, J.A. Genetic Studies of the Amish. In Background and Potentialities; Bulletin of the Johns Hopkins Hospital: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1964; Volume 115, pp. 203–222. 36. Donnermeyer, J.F.; Anderson, C.; Cooksey, E.C. The Amish Population: County Estimates and Settlement Patterns. J. Amish Plain Anabapt. Stud. 2013, 1, 72–109. [CrossRef] 37. Nolt, S.M. A History of the Amish, 3rd ed.; Good Books: New York, NY, USA, 2016. 38. Pericak-Vance, M.A.; Johnson, C.C.; Rimmler, J.B.; Saunders, A.M.; Robinson, L.C.; D’Hondt, E.G.; Jackson, C.E.; Haines, J.L. Alzheimer’s disease and apolipoprotein E-4 allele in an Amish population. Ann. Neurol. 1996, 39, 700–704. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 39. van der Walt, J.M.; Scott, W.K.; Slifer, S.; Gaskell, P.C.; Martin, E.R.; Welsh-Bohmer, K.; Creason, M.; Crunk, A.; Fuzzell, D.; McFarland, L.; et al. Maternal lineages and Alzheimer disease risk in the Old Order Amish. Hum. Genet. 2005, 118, 115–122. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 40. Ashley-Koch, A.E.; Shao, Y.; Rimmler, J.B.; Gaskell, P.C.; Welsh-Bohmer, K.A.; Jackson, C.E.; Scott, W.K.; Haines, J.L.; Pericak- Vance, M.A. An autosomal genomic screen for dementia in an extended Amish family. Neurosci. Lett. 2005, 379, 199–204. [CrossRef] 41. McCauley, J.L.; Hahs, D.W.; Jiang, L.; Scott, W.K.; Welsh-Bohmer, K.A.; Jackson, C.E.; Vance, J.M.; Pericak-Vance, M.A.; Haines, J.L. Combinatorial Mismatch Scan (CMS) for loci associated with dementia in the Amish. BMC Med. Genet. 2006, 7, 19. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 42. Hahs, D.W.; McCauley, J.L.; Crunk, A.E.; McFarland, L.L.; Gaskell, P.C.; Jiang, L.; Slifer, S.H.; Vance, J.M.; Scott, W.K.; Welsh- Bohmer, K.A.; et al. A genome-wide linkage analysis of dementia in the Amish. Am. J. Med. Genet. B Neuropsychiatr. Genet. 2006, 141B, 160–166. [CrossRef] 43. Lee, S.L.; Murdock, D.G.; McCauley, J.L.; Bradford, Y.; Crunk, A.; McFarland, L.; Jiang, L.; Wang, T.; Schnetz-Boutaud, N.; Haines, J.L. A genome-wide scan in an Amish pedigree with parkinsonism. Ann. Hum. Genet. 2008, 72, 621–629. [CrossRef] 44. Edwards, D.R.V.; Gilbert, J.R.; Jiang, L.; Gallins, P.J.; Caywood, L.; Creason, M.; Fuzzell, D.; Knebusch, C.; Jackson, C.E.; Pericak- Vance, M.A.; et al. Successful aging shows linkage to chromosomes 6, 7, and 14 in the Amish. Ann. Hum. Genet. 2011, 75, 516–528. [CrossRef] 45. D’Aoust, L.N.; Cummings, A.C.; Laux, R.; Fuzzell, D.; Caywood, L.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; Scott, W.K.; Pericak-Vance, M.A.; Haines, J.L. Examination of candidate exonic variants for association to Alzheimer disease in the Amish. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0118043. [CrossRef] 46. Nittala, M.G.; Song, Y.E.; Sardell, R.; Adams, L.D.; Pan, S.; Velaga, S.B.; Horst, V.; Dana, D.; Caywood, L.; Laux, R.; et al. AMISH EYE STUDY: Baseline Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Characteristics of Age-Related Macular Degener- ation. Retina 2019, 39, 1540–1550. [CrossRef] 47. Prum, B.E., Jr.; Rosenberg, L.F.; Gedde, S.J.; Mansberger, S.L.; Stein, J.D.; Moroi, S.E.; Herndon, L.W., Jr.; Lim, M.C.; Williams, R.D. Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern((R)) Guidelines. Ophthalmology 2016, 123, P41–P111. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 48. Prum, B.E., Jr.; Lim, M.C.; Mansberger, S.L.; Stein, J.D.; Moroi, S.E.; Gedde, S.J.; Herndon, L.W., Jr.; Rosenberg, L.F.; Williams, R.D. Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Suspect Preferred Practice Pattern((R)) Guidelines. Ophthalmology 2016, 123, P112–P151. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 49. McKusick, V.A. The Amish. Endeavour 1980, 4, 52–57. [CrossRef] 50. Colyer, C.; Anderson, C.; Stein, R.; Donnermeyer, J.F.; Wasao, S. Reviving the Demographic Study of the Amish. J. Amish Plain Anabapt. Stud. 2017, 5, 96–119. [CrossRef] 51. Agarwala, R.; Biesecker, L.G.; Schaffer, A.A. Anabaptist genealogy database. Am. J. Med. Genet. C Semin. Med. Genet. 2003, 121C, 32–37. [CrossRef] 52. Garbe, J.R.; Da, Y. Pedigraph: A Software Tool for the Graphing and Analysis of Large Complex Pedigree; Department of Animal Science, University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2008. 53. Bourgain, C. KinInbcoef: Calculation of Kinship and Inbreeding Coefficients. 2003. Available online: http://www.stat.uchicago.edu/ ~{}mcpeek/software/KinInbcoef/index.html (accessed on 22 September 2020). 54. Wiggs, J.L. Glaucoma Genes and Mechanisms. Prog. Mol. Biol. Transl. Sci. 2015, 134, 315–342. [CrossRef] 55. Wiggs, J.L. Genetic etiologies of glaucoma. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2007, 125, 30–37. [CrossRef] 56. Tielsch, J.M.; Katz, J.; Sommer, A.; Quigley, H.A.; Javitt, J.C. Family history and risk of primary open angle glaucoma. The Balti- more Eye Survey. Arch. Ophthalmol. 1994, 112, 69–73. [CrossRef] 57. Wolfs, R.C.; Klaver, C.C.; Ramrattan, R.S.; van Duijn, C.M.; Hofman, A.; de Jong, P.T. Genetic risk of primary open-angle glaucoma. Population-based familial aggregation study. Arch. Ophthalmol. 1998, 116, 1640–1645. [CrossRef] 58. Francomano, C.A.; McKusick, V.A.; Biesecker, L.G. Medical genetic studies in the Amish: Historical perspective. Am. J. Med. Genet. C Semin. Med. Genet. 2003, 121C, 1–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 59. Mitchell, B.D.; Lee, W.J.; Tolea, M.I.; Shields, K.; Ashktorab, Z.; Magder, L.S.; Ryan, K.A.; Pollin, T.I.; McArdle, P.F.; Shuldiner, A.R.; et al. Living the good life? Mortality and hospital utilization patterns in the Old Order Amish. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e51560. [CrossRef] [PubMed] http://doi.org/10.1093/bfgp/elu022 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25009120 http://doi.org/10.18061/1811/54896 http://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410390605 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8651641 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-005-0032-x http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16078048 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2004.12.065 http://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2350-7-19 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16515697 http://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.b.30257 http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2008.00452.x http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2011.00658.x http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118043 http://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000002210 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.053 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26581556 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.055 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26581560 http://doi.org/10.1016/0160-9327(80)90140-4 http://doi.org/10.18061/1811/81073 http://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.c.20004 http://www.stat.uchicago.edu/~{}mcpeek/software/KinInbcoef/index.html http://www.stat.uchicago.edu/~{}mcpeek/software/KinInbcoef/index.html http://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pmbts.2015.04.008 http://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.125.1.30 http://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1994.01090130079022 http://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.116.12.1640 http://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.c.20001 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12888981 http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051560 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23284714 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 12 of 13 60. Martin, S.N.; Sutherland, J.; Levin, A.V.; Klose, R.; Priston, M.; Heon, E. Molecular characterisation of congenital glaucoma in a consanguineous Canadian community: A step towards preventing glaucoma related blindness. J. Med. Genet. 2000, 37, 422–427. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 61. Xin, B.; Jones, S.; Puffenberger, E.G.; Hinze, C.; Bright, A.; Tan, H.; Zhou, A.; Wu, G.; Vargus-Adams, J.; Agamanolis, D.; et al. Homozygous mutation in SAMHD1 gene causes cerebral vasculopathy and early onset stroke. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 5372–5377. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 62. Klein, B.E.; Klein, R.; Lee, K.E. Heritability of risk factors for primary open-angle glaucoma: The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004, 45, 59–62. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 63. Auer, P.L.; Lettre, G. Rare variant association studies: Considerations, challenges and opportunities. Genome Med. 2015, 7, 16. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 64. Arcos-Burgos, M.; Muenke, M. Genetics of population isolates. Clin. Genet. 2002, 61, 233–247. [CrossRef] 65. Agarwala, R.; Schaffer, A.A.; Tomlin, J.F. Towards a complete North American Anabaptist Genealogy II: Analysis of inbreeding. Hum. Biol. 2001, 73, 533–545. [CrossRef] 66. Wang, L.; Choi, S.; Lee, S.; Park, T.; Won, S. Comparing family-based rare variant association tests for dichotomous phenotypes. BMC Proc. 2016, 10, 181–186. [CrossRef] 67. Choi, S.; Lee, S.; Cichon, S.; Nothen, M.M.; Lange, C.; Park, T.; Won, S. FARVAT: A family-based rare variant association test. Bioinformatics 2014, 30, 3197–3205. [CrossRef] 68. Laird, N.M.; Lange, C. Family-based designs in the age of large-scale gene-association studies. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2006, 7, 385–394. [CrossRef] 69. Pasquale, L.R.; Kang, J.H. Lifestyle, nutrition, and glaucoma. J. Glaucoma 2009, 18, 423–428. [CrossRef] 70. Wiggs, J.L. The cell and molecular biology of complex forms of glaucoma: Updates on genetic, environmental, and epigenetic risk factors. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012, 53, 2467–2469. [CrossRef] 71. Ong, S.R.; Crowston, J.G.; Loprinzi, P.D.; Ramulu, P.Y. Physical activity, visual impairment, and eye disease. Eye (London) 2018, 32, 1296–1303. [CrossRef] 72. Katz, M.L.; Ferketich, A.K.; Broder-Oldach, B.; Harley, A.; Reiter, P.L.; Paskett, E.D.; Bloomfield, C.D. Physical activity among Amish and non-Amish adults living in Ohio Appalachia. J. Community Health 2012, 37, 434–440. [CrossRef] 73. Carter, G.B.C.; Katz, M.L.; Ferketich, A.K.; Clinton, S.K.; Grainger, E.M.; Paskett, E.D.; Bloomfield, C.D. Dietary intake, food pro- cessing, and cooking methods among Amish and non-Amish adults living in Ohio Appalachia: Relevance to nutritional risk factors for cancer. Nutr. Cancer 2011, 63, 1208–1217. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 74. Ferketich, A.K.; Katz, M.L.; Kauffman, R.M.; Paskett, E.D.; Lemeshow, S.; Westman, J.A.; Clinton, S.K.; Bloomfield, C.D.; Wewers, M.E. Tobacco use among the Amish in Holmes County, Ohio. J. Rural Health 2008, 24, 84–90. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 75. Johnson, C.C.; Rybicki, B.A.; Brown, G.; D’Hondt, E.; Herpolsheimer, B.; Roth, D.; Jackson, C.E. Cognitive impairment in the Amish: A four county survey. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1997, 26, 387–394. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 76. Mitchell, B.D.; Hsueh, W.C.; King, T.M.; Pollin, T.I.; Sorkin, J.; Agarwala, R.; Schaffer, A.A.; Shuldiner, A.R. Heritability of life span in the Old Order Amish. Am. J. Med. Genet. 2001, 102, 346–352. [CrossRef] 77. Racette, B.A.; Rundle, M.; Wang, J.C.; Goate, A.; Saccone, N.L.; Farrer, M.; Lincoln, S.; Hussey, J.; Smemo, S.; Lin, J.; et al. A multi-incident, Old-Order Amish family with PD. Neurology 2002, 58, 568–574. [CrossRef] 78. Sorkin, J.; Post, W.; Pollin, T.I.; O’Connell, J.R.; Mitchell, B.D.; Shuldiner, A.R. Exploring the genetics of longevity in the Old Order Amish. Mech. Ageing Dev. 2005, 126, 347–350. [CrossRef] 79. Stambolian, D.; Ciner, E.B.; Reider, L.C.; Moy, C.; Dana, D.; Owens, R.; Schlifka, M.; Holmes, T.; Ibay, G.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E. Genome-wide scan for myopia in the Old Order Amish. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2005, 140, 469–476. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 80. Peet, J.A.; Cotch, M.F.; Wojciechowski, R.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E.; Stambolian, D. Heritability and familial aggregation of refractive error in the Old Order Amish. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007, 48, 4002–4006. [CrossRef] 81. Post, W.; Bielak, L.F.; Ryan, K.A.; Cheng, Y.C.; Shen, H.; Rumberger, J.A.; Sheedy, P.F., 2nd; Shuldiner, A.R.; Peyser, P.A.; Mitchell, B.D. Determinants of coronary artery and aortic calcification in the Old Order Amish. Circulation 2007, 115, 717–724. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 82. Pollin, T.I.; Damcott, C.M.; Shen, H.; Ott, S.H.; Shelton, J.; Horenstein, R.B.; Post, W.; McLenithan, J.C.; Bielak, L.F.; Peyser, P.A.; et al. A null mutation in human APOC3 confers a favorable plasma lipid profile and apparent cardioprotection. Science 2008, 322, 1702–1705. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 83. Racette, B.A.; Good, L.M.; Kissel, A.M.; Criswell, S.R.; Perlmutter, J.S. A population-based study of parkinsonism in an Amish community. Neuroepidemiology 2009, 33, 225–230. [CrossRef] 84. Wojciechowski, R.; Stambolian, D.; Ciner, E.; Ibay, G.; Holmes, T.N.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E. Genomewide linkage scans for ocular refraction and meta-analysis of four populations in the Myopia Family Study. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009, 50, 2024–2032. [CrossRef] 85. Wojciechowski, R.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E.; Stambolian, D. Fine-mapping of candidate region in Amish and Ashkenazi families confirms linkage of refractive error to a QTL on 1p34-p36. Mol. Vis. 2009, 15, 1398–1406. 86. Wojciechowski, R.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E.; Stambolian, D. Association of matrix metalloproteinase gene polymorphisms with refractive error in Amish and Ashkenazi families. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010, 51, 4989–4995. [CrossRef] http://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.37.6.422 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10851252 http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014265108 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21402907 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.03-0516 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14691154 http://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-015-0138-2 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25709717 http://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-0004.2002.610401.x http://doi.org/10.1353/hub.2001.0045 http://doi.org/10.1186/s12919-016-0027-8 http://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu496 http://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1839 http://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e31818d3899 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.12-9483e http://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-018-0081-8 http://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-011-9460-9 http://doi.org/10.1080/01635581.2011.607547 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22026912 http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2008.00141.x http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18257875 http://doi.org/10.1093/ije/26.2.387 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9169175 http://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1483 http://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.58.4.568 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2004.08.027 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2005.04.014 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16084785 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.06-1388 http://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.637512 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17261661 http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161524 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19074352 http://doi.org/10.1159/000229776 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.08-2848 http://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.10-5474 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1551 13 of 13 87. Cummings, A.C.; Lee, S.L.; McCauley, J.L.; Jiang, L.; Crunk, A.; McFarland, L.L.; Gallins, P.J.; Fuzzell, D.; Knebusch, C.; Jackson, C.E.; et al. A genome-wide linkage screen in the Amish with Parkinson disease points to chromosome 6. Ann. Hum. Genet. 2011, 75, 351–358. [CrossRef] 88. Cummings, A.C.; Jiang, L.; Velez Edwards, D.R.; McCauley, J.L.; Laux, R.; McFarland, L.L.; Fuzzell, D.; Knebusch, C.; Caywood, L.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; et al. Genome-wide association and linkage study in the Amish detects a novel candidate late-onset Alzheimer disease gene. Ann. Hum. Genet. 2012, 76, 342–351. [CrossRef] 89. Courtenay, M.D.; Gilbert, J.R.; Jiang, L.; Cummings, A.C.; Gallins, P.J.; Caywood, L.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; Fuzzell, D.; Knebusch, C.; Laux, R.; et al. Mitochondrial haplogroup X is associated with successful aging in the Amish. Hum. Genet. 2012, 131, 201–208. [CrossRef] 90. Davis, M.F.; Cummings, A.C.; D’Aoust, L.N.; Jiang, L.; Velez Edwards, D.R.; Laux, R.; Reinhart-Mercer, L.; Fuzzell, D.; Scott, W.K.; Pericak-Vance, M.A.; et al. Parkinson disease loci in the mid-western Amish. Hum. Genet. 2013, 132, 1213–1221. [CrossRef] 91. Edwards, D.R.V.; Gilbert, J.R.; Hicks, J.E.; Myers, J.L.; Jiang, L.; Cummings, A.C.; Guo, S.; Gallins, P.J.; Konidari, I.; Caywood, L.; et al. Linkage and association of successful aging to the 6q25 region in large Amish kindreds. Age (Dordr) 2013, 35, 1467–1477. [CrossRef] 92. Hou, L.; Faraci, G.; Chen, D.T.; Kassem, L.; Schulze, T.G.; Shugart, Y.Y.; McMahon, F.J. Amish revisited: Next-generation sequencing studies of psychiatric disorders among the Plain people. Trends Genet. 2013, 29, 412–418. [CrossRef] 93. Crawford, D.C.; Dumitrescu, L.; Goodloe, R.; Brown-Gentry, K.; Boston, J.; McClellan, B., Jr.; Sutcliffe, C.; Wiseman, R.; Baker, P.; Pericak-Vance, M.A.; et al. Rare variant APOC3 R19X is associated with cardio-protective profiles in a diverse population-based survey as part of the Epidemiologic Architecture for Genes Linked to Environment Study. Circ. Cardiovasc. Genet. 2014, 7, 848–853. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 94. Chavali, V.R.; Diniz, B.; Huang, J.; Ying, G.S.; Sadda, S.R.; Stambolian, D. Association of OCT derived drusen measurements with AMD associated-genotypic SNPs in Amish population. J. Clin. Med. 2015, 4, 304–317. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 95. Musolf, A.M.; Simpson, C.L.; Alexander, T.A.; Portas, L.; Murgia, F.; Ciner, E.B.; Stambolian, D.; Bailey-Wilson, J.E. Genome-wide scans of myopia in Pennsylvania Amish families reveal significant linkage to 12q15, 8q21.3 and 5p15.33. Hum. Genet. 2019, 138, 339–354. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 96. Hsueh, W.C.; Mitchell, B.D.; Aburomia, R.; Pollin, T.; Sakul, H.; Gelder Ehm, M.; Michelsen, B.K.; Wagner, M.J.; St Jean, P.L.; Knowler, W.C.; et al. Diabetes in the Old Order Amish: Characterization and heritability analysis of the Amish Family Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care 2000, 23, 595–601. [CrossRef] 97. Medical Alumni Association of the University of Maryland. Expediting genetic research with help from the Amish. Bulletin Fall 2004. Available online: https://www.medicalalumni.org/bulletin/fall_2004/lead1.html (accessed on 8 October 2020). 98. University of Maryland School of Medicine. Amish Research Program. Available online: https://www.medschool.umaryland. edu/endocrinology/Amish-Research-Program/ (accessed on 8 October 2020). 99. Kaplan, B.; Caddle-Steele, C.; Chisholm, G.; Esmond, W.A.; Ferryman, K.; Gertner, M.; Goytia, C.; Hauser, D.; Richardson, L.D.; Robinson, M.; et al. A Culture of Understanding: Reflections and Suggestions from a Genomics Research Community Board. Prog. Community Health Partnersh. 2017, 11, 161–165. [CrossRef] 100. Skinner, J.S.; Williams, N.A.; Richmond, A.; Brown, J.; Strelnick, A.H.; Calhoun, K.; de Loney, E.H.; Allen, S.; Pirie, A.; Wilkins, C.H. Community Experiences and Perceptions of Clinical and Translational Research and Researchers. Prog. Community Health Partnersh. 2018, 12, 263–271. [CrossRef] http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2011.00643.x http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2012.00721.x http://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-011-1060-3 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-013-1316-1 http://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-012-9447-1 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2013.01.007 http://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.113.000369 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25363704 http://doi.org/10.3390/jcm4020304 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25893111 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-019-01991-0 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30826882 http://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.23.5.595 https://www.medicalalumni.org/bulletin/fall_2004/lead1.html https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/endocrinology/Amish-Research-Program/ https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/endocrinology/Amish-Research-Program/ http://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2017.0020 http://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2018.0050 Introduction Materials and Methods Study Participants Amish Pedigree Results GGLEAM Study Participants Family History of Glaucoma Quantitative Ocular Measurements Genealogy of GGLEAM Study Participants Discussion Conclusions References