4.2 Article

KLOTHO Gene Polymorphism Is Associated With Coronary Artery Stenosis but Not With Coronary Calcification in a Korean Population

期刊

INTERNATIONAL HEART JOURNAL
卷 50, 期 1, 页码 23-32

出版社

INT HEART JOURNAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1536/ihj.50.23

关键词

Klotho; Gene; Coronary artery; Atherosclerosis; Stenosis; Calcification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Experimental Studies have demonstrated KLOTHO gene polymorphism might be associated with vascular atherosclerosis and calcification. However, the impact of this genetic variant oil human coronary arteries still remains to be elucidated. We investigated the effect of a KLOTHO gene variant on coronary artery stenosis and calcification. Four hundred and thirty-four patients referred for chest pain were enrolled. All the patients underwent coronary angiography and were investigated for polymorphism of the KLOTHO G395A gene. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was defined as >= 50% diameter stenosis ill lit least one Coronary artery. The other patients were considered to be controls. Homozygotes or heterozygotes for G395A were significantly more common in the CAD patients than in the controls (30.2% versus 21.5%, P = 0.039). Ill the subgroup aged < 60 years, the G395A mutant was more frequent in CAD than in control (35.3% versus 18.8%, P = 0.016), but in patients >= 60 years, there was no difference (28.0% Versus 24.1%, P = 0.473). Using multivariate analysis, we identified the KLOTHO gene G395A mutant as an independent risk factor of CAD (OR 1.712, 95% CI [1.066-2.749], P = 0.026). The frequency of the KLOTHO gene G395A mutant was not different between the calcified and noncalcified coronary artery groups (25.7%, 26.4%, respectively, P = 0.861) and all A allele carrier state was not all independent risk factor of coronary artery calcification. In conclusion, the KLOTHO gene G395A allele carrier state may be associated with CAD but not with coronary artery calcification in this Korean population. (Int Heart J 2009; 50: 23-32)

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

4.2
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