3.9 Article

Comparative analysis of associations between polymorphic variants of the F2, F5, GP1BA, and ACE genes and the risk of developing stroke in Russian and Ukrainian populations

Journal

MOLECULAR GENETICS MICROBIOLOGY AND VIROLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages 8-14

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3103/S0891416813010072

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research
  2. Russian Academy of Sciences program Molecular and Cellular Biology
  3. Russian Academy of Sciences program Basic Sciences for the Sake of Medicine
  4. Program for Support of Leading Scientific Schools of the Russian Federation [NSh-4294-2012-4]
  5. National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine [22/08-09 DF]
  6. [02.522.11.2018]
  7. [16.740.11.0002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We performed comparative analysis of associations between the F2 gene G20210A polymorphism, the F5 gene G1691A polymorphism, the GP1BA gene -5T/C polymorphism, the ACE gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism and the risk of developing stroke in two samples drawn from ethnic Russian and ethnic Ukrainian populations. It has been shown, that among the Russian population, the risk of developing ischemic stroke is increased in DD genotype individuals (odds ratio (OR) = 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.05; 1.78], p = 0.02), whereas the I/I and I/D genotypes are associated with a decreased risk of developing stroke (OR = 0.7, 95% CI [0.56; 0.95], p = 0.02). In the ethnic Ukrainian sample, differences in the distribution of genotypes and allele frequencies between stroke patients and the control group of subjects with regard to this polymorphic locus are statistically unreliable and the ACE gene I/D polymorphism is unassociated with the risk of developing stroke in the Ukrainian population (OR = 0.8, 95% DI[0.48; 1.32], p = 0.45). The F2 gene G20210A polymorphism, the F5 gene G1691A polymorphism, and the GP1BA gene -5T/C polymorphism are unassociated with stroke risk factor across both ethnic samples.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available