4.7 Article

Systematic genetic analysis of early-onset gout: ABCG2 is the only associated locus

期刊

RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 59, 期 9, 页码 2544-2549

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez685

关键词

gout; genetics; urate

资金

  1. Health Research Council of New Zealand [14-527]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. The aim of this study was to examine whether serum urate-associated genetic variants are associated with early-onset gout. Methods. Participants with gout in the Genetics of Gout in Aotearoa study with available genotyping were included (n = 1648). Early-onset gout was defined as the first presentation of gout <40 years of age. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for the 10 loci most strongly associated with serum urate were genotyped. Allelic association of the SNPs with early-onset gout was tested using logistic regression in an unadjusted model and in a model adjusted for sex, body mass index, tophus presence, flare frequency, serum creatinine and highest serum urate. The analysis was also done in two replication cohorts: Eurogout (n = 704) and Ardea (n = 755), and data were meta-analysed. Results. In the Genetics of Gout in Aotearoa study, there were 638 (42.4%) participants with early-onset gout. The ABCG2 rs2231142 gout risk T-allele was present more frequently in participants with early-onset gout compared with the later-onset group. For the other SNPs tested, no differences in risk allele number were observed. In the allelic association analysis, the ABCG2 rs2231142 T-allele was associated with early-onset gout in unadjusted and adjusted models. Analysis of the replication cohorts confirmed the association of early-onset gout with the ABCG2 rs2231142 T-allele, but not with other serum urate-associated SNPs. In the meta-analysis, the odds ratio (95% CI) for early-onset gout for the ABCG2 rs2231142 T-allele was 1.60 (1.41, 1.83). Conclusion. In contrast to other serum urate-raising variants, the ABCG2 rs2231142 T-allele is strongly associated with early-onset gout.

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

4.7
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