4.3 Article

Arylamine N-acetyltransferase 2 slow acetylator polymorphisms in unrelated Iranian individuals

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 7, Pages 467-471

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-004-0799-z

Keywords

acetylation; NAT2; polymorphism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the frequency of mutations at the polymorphic gene coding for arylamine N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2, EC 2.3.1.5) and NAT2 genotypes associated with slow acetylation in healthy Iranian individuals. Methods: The polymorphisms in the NAT2 gene from 88 unrelated healthy subjects (48 men/40 women) from the general Tehran population were discriminated using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with allele-specific primers (341 C > T) and PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (481 C > T, 590 G > A, and 857 G > A). Results: Frequencies of the studied polymorphisms showed the most common alleles to be NAT2*4 (0.43) and NAT2*5, 481 C > T (0.32), followed by NAT2*6 (0.19) and NAT2*7 (0.06), previously referred to as WT, M1, M2, and M3, respectively. The most prevalent genotypes were NAT2*4/*5 [(31.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 29-34%] and *4/*4 (18.2%; 95% CL 16-21%). When grouped according to the expected phenotypical effects, the resulting genotypes revealed the significant prevalence of the subjects with slow (32.9%) and intermediate (48.9%) acetylation status compared with wild-type rapid (18.2%) acetylators (P < 0.01). Conclusions: The overall allele pattern and acetylator status distribution in Iranians displayed the considerable prevalence of slow acetylators over rapid acetylators, similar to those of Caucasians except for a minor difference observed in the frequency of the NAT2*7 allele. Nucleic acid testing for common NAT2 mutations might be a potentially useful tool for an accurate phenotype interpretation and identification of Iranian individuals at risk.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available