4.0 Article

Rapid and high throughput genotyping of the growth hormone receptor exon 3 deleted/full-length polymorphism using a tagSNP

Journal

GROWTH HORMONE & IGF RESEARCH
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 270-273

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ghir.2010.02.004

Keywords

GHR; d3/fl polymorphism; TagSNP; Genotyping method

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council [K2007-55X-11285-13-3, K2008-65p-20758-01]
  2. Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research
  3. Swedish federal government
  4. University of Gothenburg
  5. Novo Nordisk Scandinavia AB
  6. Pfizer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The growth hormone (GH) receptor (GHR) exon 3 deleted/full-length (d3/fl) polymorphism has been suggested to affect GH sensitivity. The conventional genotyping method used for this polymorphism (multiplex PCR with fragment detection by gel electrophoresis) is laborious and requires large amount of DNA template. This has restricted analysis of this polymorphism to small cohorts. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of using a tagging single nucleotide polymorphism (tagSNP) as a marker for the d3/fl polymorphism. Design: The d3/fl polymorphism was analyzed using TaqMan SNP genotyping of the tagSNP rs6873545 in 183 patients with adult GB deficiency (GHD). The results were compared to d3/fl genotypes determined by the conventional method. Results: Genotyping success rate for the tagSNP was 100%. Frequency of the d3-allele was 24.0% (d3/d3 7.7%, d3/fl 32.2% and fl/fl 60.1%) and the results from the two different methods were identical. Moreover, three samples previously undetermined when genotyped using the conventional method were successfully analyzed using the tagSNP. Conclusion: The GHR d3/fl polymorphism can be studied by TaqMan SNP genotyping. Use of the tagSNP facilitates investigations of the effects of the d3/fl polymorphism in large cohorts. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available