4.2 Article

Genetic variations related to maternal whole blood mitochondrial DNA copy number: a genome-wide and candidate gene study

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE
卷 30, 期 20, 页码 2433-2439

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2016.1252747

关键词

Maternal mitochondrial DNA copy number; genetic variation; oxidative phosphorylation; mitochondrial biogenesis; pregnancy

资金

  1. National Institute of Health
  2. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R01HD059827, T32HD052462]
  3. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute [K01HL10374]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We conducted genome-wide (GWAS) and candidate gene association studies of maternal mitochondrial DNA copy number. Maternal peripheral blood was collected during labor and delivery admission from 471 participants of a placental abruption case-control study conducted in Lima, Peru. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping was performed using the Illumina Cardio-Metabo Chip. Whole blood mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number was measured using qRT-PCR techniques. We evaluated 119,629 SNPs in the GWAS and 161 SNPs (in 29 mitochondrial biogenesis and oxidative phosphorylation genes) in the candidate association study. Top hits from GWAS and the candidate gene study were selected to compute weighted genetic risk scores (wGRS). Linear regression models were used to calculate effect size estimates and related nominal p values. The top hit in our GWAS was chr19:51063065 in FOXA3 (empirical p values=2.20e-6). A total of 134 SNPs had p values<0.001 including rs17111633 in CNNM1 (p values=6.32e-6) and chr19:51083059 in MYPOP (p values=3.23e-5). In the candidate association study, several SNPs in PPARG, PRKCA, SP1 and THRB were associated with mtDNA copy number (p values<0.05). mtDNA copy number was significantly associated with wGRS based on top GWAS hits (=0.49, 95% CI:0.38-0.60, p<0.001). Variations in nuclear DNA are potentially associated with maternal mtDNA copy number.

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