4.7 Article

Serum levels and gene polymorphisms of angiopoietin 2 in systemic lupus erythematosus patients

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-79544-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81701606]
  2. Sichuan Provincial Science and Technology Program [2019YJ0540]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that SLE patients had increased serum Ang2 levels, which could potentially serve as a biomarker, and identified certain Ang2 gene polymorphisms associated with SLE susceptibility.
This study aimed to discuss association between serum Angiopoietin2 (Ang2) levels, Ang2 gene polymorphisms and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) susceptibility. It was carried out by 235 SLE, 342 other inflammatory autoimmune diseases patients and 380 healthy individuals. Serum Ang2 levels was examinated by ELISA, and Ang2 rs12674822, rs1823375, rs1868554, rs2442598, rs3739390 and rs734701 polymorphisms were genotyped using KASP. Increased Ang2 concentrations in SLE patients were observed compared with healthy controls and patients with other inflammatory autoimmune diseases. For allelic contrast, except for rs1823375 (P=0.058) and rs2442598 (P=0.523), frequencies of alleles for other polymorphisms were significantly different between SLE patients and controls. Genotypes for rs12674822 (TT), rs1868554 (TT, TA and TT+TA), rs734701 (TT) were negatively correlated with SLE susceptibility (OR=0.564 for rs12674822; OR=0.572, OR=0.625, OR=0.607 for rs1868554; OR=0.580 for rs734701). Patients carrying rs1868554 T allele and rs3739390 G allele were more likely to develop hematuria (P=0.039; P=0.003). The G allele frequencies of rs12674822 and rs2442598 were higher in SLE patients with proteinuria (P=0.043; P=0.043). GC genotype frequency of rs3739390 was higher in patients with ds-DNA (+) (P=0.024). In summary, SLE had increased serum Ang2, which may be a potential biomarker, and the polymorphisms correlated with SLE.

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