4.7 Article

Maternal MTHFR 677C>T is a risk factor for congenital heart defects:: effect modification by periconceptional folate supplementation

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 27, Issue 8, Pages 981-987

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi815

Keywords

congenital heart defects; folate; MTHFR; periconceptional folate supplementation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims Periconceptional folate supplementation prevents neural tube defects and possibly congenital heart defects (CHD) as well. The search for candidate genes involved in the folate metabolism includes the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) 677C > T polymorphism. We studied the association between MTHFR 677C > T variants and CHD risk. The interaction with periconceptional folate supplementation was also investigated. Methods and results A case-control study and a family-based transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) were conducted to explore this association. In 133 triads, the TDT revealed no association of the fetal 677T allele with the development of a heart defect. In 158 mothers with a CHD-affected child, the maternal MTHFR 677CT and TT genotypes in combination with no use of periconceptional folate supplements were associated with, respectively, a three-fold (OR 3.3 95% CI 1.46-7.32) and six-fold (OR 6.3 95% CI 2.32-17.27) increased risk for conotruncal heart defects in offspring. In a case-only study, the interaction between periconceptional folate supplementation and maternal MTHFR genotype was significant (P=0.012). Conclusion The maternal MTHFR 677C > T variants are a risk factor for CHD in offspring, confined to conotruncal heart defects. A gene-environment interaction between maternal MTFHR 677CT and TT genotypes with periconceptional folate supplementation was observed. These findings provide a mechanism of the protective role of folate and support the thesis that periconceptional folate supplementation might prevent CHD.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available