4.7 Article

Chromogranin a polymorphisms are associated with hypertensive renel disease

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2007070754

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [RR00827, M01 RR000827] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [P01 HL058120] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDA NIH HHS [T32-DA007315, T32 DA007315] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK070941] Funding Source: Medline
  5. NIGMS NIH HHS [T32-GM08666, T32 GM008666] Funding Source: Medline
  6. NIMHD NIH HHS [MD000220, P60 MD000220] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chromogranin A is released together with epinephrine and norepinephrine from catecholaminergic cells. Specific endopeptidases cleave chromogranin A into biologically active peptide fragments, including catestatin, which inhibits catecholamine release. Previous studies have suggested that a deficit in this sympathetic braking system might be an early event in the pathogenesis of human hypertension. Whether chromogranin A (CHGA) polymorphisms predict end-organ complications of hypertension, such as end-stage renal disease, is unknown. Among blacks, we studied common genetic variants spanning the CHGA locus in 2 independent case-control studies of hypertensive ESRD. Two haplotypes were significantly more frequent among subjects with hypertensive ESRD: 1) in the promoter (5') region, G-462A -> T-415C -> C-89A, haplotype ATC (adjusted odds ratio = 2.65; P = 0.037), and 2) at the 3 '-end, C11825T (3'-UTR, C+87T)-> G12602C, haplotype TC (adjusted odds ratio = 2.73, P =0.0196). Circulating levels of catestatin were lower among those with hypertensive ESRD than controls, an unexpected finding given that peptide levels are usually elevated in ESRD because of reduced renal elimination. We found that the 3'-UTR + 87T variant decreased reporter gene expression, providing a possible mechanistic explanation for diminished catestatin. In summary, common variants in chromogranin A associate with the risk of hypertensive ESRD in blacks.

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

4.7
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