4.8 Article

Genetics of P450 oxidoreductase: Sequence variation in 842 individuals of four ethnicities and activities of 15 missense mutations

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0711621105

关键词

cytochrome P450; drug metabolism; electron transfer; pharmacogenomics; steroidogenesis

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM073020] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P450 oxidoreductase (POR) is an electron-donating flavoprotein required for the activity of all microsomal cytochrome P450 enzymes. We sequenced 5,655 bp of the POR gene in a representative population of 842 healthy unrelated individuals in four ethnic groups: 218 African Americans, 260 Caucasian Americans, 179 Chinese Americans, and 185 Mexican Americans. One hundred forty SNPs were detected, of which 43 were found in >= 1% of alleles. Twelve SNPs were in the POR promoter region. Fifteen of 32 exonic variations altered the FOR amino acid sequence;. 13 of these 15 are previously undescribed missense variations, We found eight indels, only one of which was in the coding region. A previously described variant, A503V, was found on 27.9% of all alleles with some ethnic predilection (19.1% in African Americans, 26.4% in Caucasian Americans, 36.7% Chinese Americans, an 31.0% in Mexican Americans). We built cDNA expression vectors for the 13 previously undescribed missense variants, expressed each protein lacking 27 N-terminal residues in Escherichia coli, and assayed the apparent K-m and V-max of each in four assays: reduction of cytochrome c, oxidation of NADPH, 17 alpha-hydroxylase activity of P450c17, and 17,20 lyase activity of P450c17. The catalytic activities of several missense mutants differed substantially in these assays, indicating that each POR mutant must be assayed separately with each potential target P450 enzyme. The activity of A503V was reduced to a modest but statistically significant degree in all four assays, suggesting that it may play an important role in interindividual variation in drug response.

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

4.8
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