4.5 Review

Control of fetal hemoglobin: new insights emerging from genomics and clinical implications

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 18, 期 -, 页码 R216-R223

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddp401

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH-NHLBI [R01-HL69259-03]
  2. Medical Research Council, UK [G0000111]
  3. Medical Research Council [G0000111] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G0000111] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increased levels of fetal hemoglobin (HbF, alpha 2 gamma 2) are of no consequence in healthy adults, but confer major clinical benefits in patients with sickle cell anemia (SCA) and beta thalassemia, diseases that represent major public health problems. Inter-individual HbF variation is largely genetically controlled, with one extreme caused by mutations involving the beta globin gene (HBB) complex, historically referred to as pancellular hereditary persistence of fetal hemoglobin (HPFH). These Mendelian forms of HPFH are rare and do not explain the common form of heterocellular HPFH which represents the upper tail of normal HbF variation, and is clearly inherited as a quantitative genetic trait. Genetic studies have identified three major quantitative trait loci (QTLs) (Xmn1-HBG2, HBS1L-MYB intergenic region on chromosome 6q23, and BCL11A on chromosome 2p16) that account for 20-50% of the common variation in HbF levels in patients with SCA and 0 thalassemia, and in healthy adults. Two of the major QTLs include oncogenes, emphasizing the importance of cell proliferation and differentiation as an important contribution to the HbF phenotype. The review traces the story of HbF quantitative genetics that uncannily mirrors the changing focus in genetic methodology, from candidate genes through positional cloning, to genome-wide association, that have expedited the dissection of the genetic architecture underlying HbF variability. These genetic results have already provided remarkable insights into molecular mechanisms that underlie the hemoglobin 'switch'.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据