4.4 Article

A gene-environment study of the paraoxonase 1 gene and pesticides in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

NEUROTOXICOLOGY
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 532-540

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuro.2006.11.007

关键词

amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); motor neuron disease; genetic susceptibility; organophosphates; paraoxonase 1; gene-environment interaction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (SALS) causes progressive muscle weakness because of the loss of motor neurons. SALS has been associated with exposure to environmental toxins, including pesticides and chemical warfare agents, many of which are organophosphates. The enzyme paraoxonase 1 (PON1) detoxifies organophosphates and the efficacy of this enzyme varies with polymorphisms in the PON1 gene. To determine if an impaired ability to break down organophosphates underlies some cases of SALS, we compared the frequencies of PON1 polymorphisms in SALS patients and controls and investigated gene-environment interactions with self-reported pesticide/herbicide exposure. The PON1 coding polymorphisms L55M, Q192R and 1102V, and the promoter polymorphisms -909c > g, -832g > a, -162g > a and -108c > t, were genotyped in 143 SALS patients and 143 matched controls. Statistical comparisons were carried out at allele, genotype and haplotype levels. The PON1 promoter allele -108t, which reduces PON1 expression, was strongly associated with SALS. Overall, promoter haplotypes that decrease PON1 expression were associated with SALS, whereas haplotypes that increase expression were associated with controls. Coding polymorphisms did not correlate with SALS. Gene-environment interactions were identified at the allele level for some promoter SNPs and pesticide/herbicide exposure, but not at the genotype or haplotype level. In conclusion, some PON1 promoter polymorphisms may predispose to SALS, possibly by making motor neurons more susceptible to organophosphate-containing toxins. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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