4.6 Article

Factor VII coagulant activity, factor VII-670A/C and-402G/A polymorphisms, and risk of venours thromboembolism

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 5, 期 8, 页码 1674-1678

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2007.02620.x

关键词

blood coagulation factors; factor VII; prospective study; pulmonary embolus; venous thrombosis

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01 HL59367, N01-HC 55015, N01-HC-55021, N01-HC-85086, N01-HC-85079, N01-HC-55022, N01-HC-75150, N01-HC-45133, N01-HC-55016, N01-HC-55020, N01-HC-55019, N01-HC-55018] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Most epidemiological studies have found no association between levels of factor (F) VII:C and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Our Longitudinal Investigation of Thromboembolism Etiology (LITE) had, in contrast, reported an independent, increased risk of VTE after 7.8 years of follow-up for those with high baseline levels of FVII:C. Objective: To confirm whether FVII:C is associated with VTE after 12.6 years of follow-up and to examine whether two FVII gene polymorphisms (-670A/C and -402G/A) are related to VTE occurrence. Methods: In 19 091 LITE participants with no prior history of VTE or cancer, we measured FVII:C at baseline and identified 404 new VTEs. We also performed a nested case-control study to relate the polymorphisms to VTE (n = 490 without exclusion for cancer or prior VTE). Results: FVII:C was not independently associated with VTE occurrence after extended follow-up. Multivariable-adjusted rate ratios for VTE were 1.00, 1.00, 0.94, 1.00, and 1.38 (P-trend = 0.48) for the < 25th, 25th-49th, 50th-74th, 75th-94th, and 95th percentiles of FVII:C, respectively. The -670C and -402A alleles were in high linkage disequilibrium, and both were associated with greater FVII:C levels. However, neither polymorphism was associated with VTE occurrence. Conclusion: After extended follow-up, LITE offers little evidence that a greater FVII level is a risk factor for VTE.

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