4.4 Review

Recent progress in the genetics of Wegener's granulomatosis and Churg-Strauss syndrome

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 8-14

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/BOR.0b013e3283331151

Keywords

antineutrophil-associated systemic vasculitides; antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody; association; human leukocyte antigen; polymorphism

Categories

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [KFO 170]
  2. FoRUM [F601-2007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review Recently, numerous studies have been performed to elucidate the genetic background of Wegener's granulomatosis and Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS). Many of these investigations suffer from low statistical power, inconsistent case classification and other error-prone study designs. The majority of these findings has to be considered preliminary, if not spurious. We summarize the most important and robust findings. Recent findings HLA-DPB1, the association of which with Wegener's granulomatosis has been discovered some years ago, is still the strongest and best replicated risk locus for this condition. Yet, no association is demonstrable for CSS, in which another HLA locus, HLA-DR, seems to be more important. Vice versa, a strong association with IL10 promotor polymorphisms was detected in CSS but not in a large Wegener's granulomatosis panel. Numerous other associations, including CTLA4, CD226 and copy number polymorphisms of FCGR3B still need further investigation, before reliable conclusions can be drawn. Summary In order to be able to evaluate critically the genetic background of Wegener's granulomatosis and CSS future projects should take into account several aspects of study design. These preconditions include sufficient numbers of cases (i.e. statistical power) and a clear-cut classification of these cases, thus allowing differentiated analyses of certain disease subgroups.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available