4.6 Article

Genetic polymorphisms associated with the risk of concussion in 1056 college athletes: a multicentre prospective cohort study

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
卷 52, 期 3, 页码 192-+

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-097419

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE)
  2. American Medical Society of Sports Medicine (AMSSM)
  3. Physicians Medical Education and Research Foundation of the University of Tennessee Medical Center (PMERF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/aim To evaluate the association of genetic polymorphisms APOE, APOE G-219T promoter, microtubule associated protein(MAPT)/tau exon 6 Ser(53)Pro, MAPT/tau Hist(47)Tyr, IL-6572 G/C and IL-6R(Asp)358(Ala) with the risk of concussion in college athletes. Methods A 23-centre prospective cohort study of 1056 college athletes with genotyping was completed between August 2003 and December 2012. All athletes completed baseline medical and concussion questionnaires, and post-concussion data were collected for athletes with a documented concussion. Results The study cohort consisted of 1056 athletes of mean +/- SD age 19.7 +/- 1.5 years, 89.3% male, 59.4% Caucasian, 35.0% African-American, 5.6% other race. The athletes participated in American football, soccer, basketball, softball, men's wrestling and club rugby. A total of 133 (12.1% prevalence) concussions occurred during an average surveillance of 3 years per athlete. We observed a significant positive association between IL-6R CC (p=0.001) and a negative association between APOE4 (p=0.03) and the risk of concussion. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analysis showed a significant association between IL-6R CC and concussion (OR 3.48; 95% CI 1.58 to 7.65; p=0.002) and between the APOE4 allele and concussion (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.96; p=0.04), which persisted after adjustment for confounders. Conclusions IL-6R CC was associated with a three times greater concussion risk and APOE4 with a 40% lower risk.

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

4.6
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