4.6 Article

Search for genetic association between IgA nephropathy and candidate genes selected by function or by gene mapping at loci IGAN2 and IGAN3

期刊

NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION
卷 27, 期 6, 页码 2328-2337

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfr633

关键词

association study; C1GALT1; genetics; IgA nephropathy; polymorphisms

资金

  1. University of Turin
  2. Regione Piemonte

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is not generally considered a hereditary disease, even though extensive evidence suggests an undefined genetic influence. Linkage analysis identified a number of genome regions that could contain variations linked to IgAN. Methods. In this case-control association study, genes possibly involved in the development of IgAN were investigated. DNA samples from 460 North Italian patients with IgAN and 444 controls were collected. Candidate genes were selected based on their possible functional involvement (6 genes) or because of their location within linkage-identified genomic regions IGAN2 and IGAN3 (5 and 13 genes within chromosome 4q26-31 and 17q12-22, respectively). One hundred and ninety-two tag and functional single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were typed with Veracode GoldenGate technology (Illumina). Results. C1GALT1 showed an association with IgAN (rs1008898: P = 0.0019 and rs7790522: P = 0.0049). Associations were found when the population was stratified by gender (C1GALT1, CD300LG, GRN, ITGA2B, ITGB3 in males and C1GALT1, TRPC3, B4GALNT2 in females) and by age (TLR4, ITGB3 in patients aged <27 years). Furthermore, rs7873784 in TLR4 showed an association with proteinuria (G allele: P = 0.0091; GG genotype: P = 0.0077). Conclusions. Age and gender are likely to evidence distinct immunological and inflammatory reactions leading to individual susceptibility to IgAN. Overall, a genetic predisposition to sporadic IgAN was found. We might hypothesize that C1GALT1 and TLR4 polymorphisms influence the risk to develop IgAN and proteinuria, respectively.

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

4.6
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