4.7 Article

Candidate Gene Polymorphisms for Ischemic Stroke

Journal

STROKE
Volume 40, Issue 11, Pages 3436-3442

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.558015

Keywords

candidate genes; genetics; ischemic stroke

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services [Z01 AG00095406]
  2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01 NS39987]
  3. Medical Research Council [G0701075] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G0701075] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose-Ischemic stroke (IS) is a multifactorial disorder with strong evidence from twin, family, and animal model studies suggesting a genetic influence on risk and prognosis. Several candidate genes for IS have been proposed, but few have been replicated. We investigated the contribution of 67 candidate genes (369 single nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]) on the risk of IS in a North American population of European descent. Methods-Two independent studies were performed. In the first, 342 SNPs from 52 candidate genes were genotyped in 307 IS cases and 324 control subjects. The SNPs significantly associated with IS were tested for replication in another cohort of 583 IS cases and 270 control subjects. In the second study, 212 SNPs from 62 candidate genes were analyzed in 710 IS cases with subtyping available and 3751 control subjects. Results-None of the candidate genes (SNPs) were significantly associated with IS risk independent of known stroke risk factors after correction for multiple hypotheses testing. Conclusion-These results are consistent with previous meta-analyses that demonstrate an absence of genetic association of variants in plausible candidate genes with IS risk. Our study suggests that the effect of the investigated SNPs may be weak or restricted to specific populations or IS subtypes. (Stroke. 2009; 40: 3436-3442.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available