4.8 Review

Leveraging Genetic Findings for Precision Medicine in Vasculitis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01796

关键词

systemic vasculitis; polymorphism; genome-wide association studies; immunochip; precision medicine

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII, Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Competitiveness) [PI18/00040]
  2. Cooperative Research Thematic Network (RETICS) programme [RD16/0012/0013, RD16/0012/0009]
  3. ISCIII (Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness)
  4. ISCIII (Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness) [CP17/00008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vasculitides are a heterogeneous group of low frequent disorders, mainly characterized by the inflammation of blood vessels that narrows or occlude the lumen and limits the blood flow, leading eventually to significant tissue and organ damage. These disorders are classified depending on the size of the affected blood vessels in large, medium, and small vessel vasculitis. Currently, it is known that these syndromes show a complex etiology in which both environmental and genetic factors play a major role in their development. So far, these conditions are not curable and the therapeutic approaches are mainly symptomatic. Moreover, a percentage of the patients do not adequately respond to standard treatments. Over the last years, numerous genetic studies have been carried out to identify susceptibility loci and biological pathways involved in vasculitis pathogenesis as well as potential genetic predictors of treatment response. The ultimate goal of these studies is to identify new therapeutic targets and to improve the use of existing drugs to achieve more effective treatments. This review will focus on the main advances made in the field of genetics and pharmacogenetics of vasculitis and their potential application for ameliorating long-term outcomes in patient management and in the development of precision medicine.

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