4.8 Article

Positive association of the endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene polymorphisms with high-altitude pulmonary edema

Journal

CIRCULATION
Volume 106, Issue 7, Pages 826-830

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000024409.30143.70

Keywords

hypoxia; hypertension, pulmonary; genes; nitric oxide synthase

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background-A defect of nitric oxide (NO) synthesis in the lung of high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE) has been suggested to contribute to its exaggerated pulmonary hypertension. Several polymorphisms have been identified in the,gene encoding endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS), which is a key enzyme responsible for NO synthesis, some of which were reported to be associated with vascular disorders. Methods and Results-We studied 41 HAPE-susceptible subjects (HAPE-s) and 51 healthy climbers (control group) in a Japanese population. We examined 2 polymorphisms of the eNOS gene, including the Glu298Asp variant and 27-base pair (bp) variable numbers of tandem repeats using polymerase chain reaction followed by restriction fragment length polymorphism. The Asp allelic frequency of the Glu298Asp variant was 25.6% in the HAPE-s and 9.8% in the controls, which was significantly different between the two groups (P=0.0044). The eNOS4a allelic frequency of 27-bp variable numbers of tandem repeats was 23.2% in the HAPE-s, significantly higher than that of 6.9% in the controls (P=0.0016). In HAPE-s group, 11 of 41 (26.8%) subjects possessed simultaneously both of the two significant alleles, but among the controls, none did, which showed a high statistical difference between the two groups (P=0.000059). Conclusions-Both polymorphisms of the eNOS gene were significantly associated with HAPE. A genetic background may underlie the impaired NO synthesis in the pulmonary circulation of HAPE-s. These polymorphisms could be genetic markers for predicting the susceptibility to HAPE.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available