4.6 Article

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor gene polymorphism and telomere shortening in essential hypertension

Journal

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 351, Issue 1-2, Pages 13-18

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11010-010-0706-0

Keywords

Angiotensin II type 1 receptor; Polymorphism; Telomere length; Essential hypertension; RFLP-PCR; qPCR

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several genetic studies were carried out among hypertensive patients to assess allelic association at the 1166 position of the 3' untranslated region of angiotensin II type 1 receptor gene. In addition, attempts have also been made to find out whether telomere length attrition is associated with hypertension. The main aim of this study was to examine the association of A1166C polymorphism of angiotensin II type 1 receptor and telomere length with essential hypertension in Egyptian people. Angiotensin II type 1 genotyping and relative telomere length were investigated by PCR in 40 patients of essential hypertension and 15 healthy controls. The homozygous AA1166 allele frequency was 92.8% among the studied subjects. There was no intergroup variation in A allele frequency in normotensive group. The frequency of homozygous A allele was significantly higher in hypertensive than normotensive subjects (97.5 and 80%, respectively) with higher frequencies in male patients. The average telomere length ratio was significantly shorter in hypertensive than in normal subjects (1.08 +/- A 0.3 and 1.54 +/- A 0.18, respectively). No correlation was observed between telomere length ratio and body mass index. This study suggests that the homozygous A1166 allele of angiotensin II type 1 and short telomeres may be predisposing factors for essential hypertension in Egyptians and may be involved in the pathogenesis of the disease. Further strategies for treating high-risk patients could result in prevention or delay of end organ damage.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available