4.6 Article

CFH, C3 and ARMS2 Are Significant Risk Loci for Susceptibility but Not for Disease Progression of Geographic Atrophy Due to AMD

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 4, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007418

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a prevalent cause of blindness in Western societies. Variants in the genes encoding complement factor H (CFH), complement component 3 (C3) and age-related maculopathy susceptibility 2 (ARMS2) have repeatedly been shown to confer significant risks for AMD; however, their role in disease progression and thus their potential relevance for interventional therapeutic approaches remains unknown. Methodology/Principal Findings: Here, we analyzed association between variants in CFH, C3 and ARMS2 and disease progression of geographic atrophy (GA) due to AMD. A quantitative phenotype of disease progression was computed based on longitudinal observations by fundus autofluorescence imaging. In a subset of 99 cases with pure bilateral GA, variants in CFH (Y402H), C3 (R102G), and ARMS2 (A69S) are associated with disease (P = 1.6 x 10(-9), 3.2 x 10(-3), and P = 2.6 x 10(-12), respectively) when compared to 612 unrelated healthy control individuals. In cases, median progression rate of GA over a mean follow-up period of 3.0 years was 1.61 mm(2)/year with high concordance between fellow eyes. No association between the progression rate and any of the genetic risk variants at the three loci was observed (P>0.13). Conclusions/Significance: This study confirms that variants at CFH, C3, and ARMS2 confer significant risks for GA due to AMD. In contrast, our data indicate no association of these variants with disease progression which may have important implications for future treatment strategies. Other, as yet unknown susceptibilities may influence disease progression.

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