4.2 Article

The contribution of six polymorphisms to cardiovascular risk in a Dutch high-risk primary care population: the HIPPOCRATES project

期刊

JOURNAL OF HUMAN HYPERTENSION
卷 23, 期 10, 页码 659-667

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jhh.2009.6

关键词

cardiovascular diseases; genetics; renin-angiotensin system; single nucleotide polymorphism; primary care

资金

  1. SOHO (Stichting Ondersteuning Hypertensie Onderzoek) Amsterdam, the Netherlands
  2. University Hospital Maastricht [PF194]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study was designed to examine the contribution of six polymorphisms to the occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in a Dutch primary care population with a high prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. In this cross-sectional case-control study, 232 patients with CVD and 571 event-free controls were studied. Patients were genotyped for the AGTR1 (A1166C), AGT (M235T), ACE (4656rpt), NOS3 (E298D), GNB3 (C825T) and ADD1 (G460W) polymorphisms. Univariate and multivariate odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to assess the relationship between genotypes and CVD. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to quantify the contribution of the polymorphisms to the prediction of CVD. No differences in either genotype or allele frequencies were found between CVD cases and controls. Multivariate analyses, corrected for multiple testing according to Bonferroni, showed significant protective associations for the T-allele of AGT (OR = 0.55 (0.34-0.84)) and for the T-allele of ADD1 (OR = 0.52 (0.31-0.82)). ROC analysis showed only a very small improvement of CVD risk prediction by adding the six polymorphisms to a model with traditional risk factors. Our data suggest that a major attribution of the six polymorphisms to the cardiovascular risk prediction in a primary care population such as HIPPOCRATES is unlikely. Journal of Human Hypertension (2009) 23, 659-667; doi:10.1038/jhh.2009.6; published online 26 February 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据