4.7 Article

The association of polymorphisms in the type 1 and 2 deiodinase genes with circulating thyroid hormone parameters and atrophy of the medial temporal lobe

期刊

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2006-1331

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Thyroid function has been related to Alzheimer disease ( AD) and neuroimaging markers thereof. Whether thyroid dysfunction contributes to or results from developing AD remains unclear. Variations in the deiodinase type 1 (DIO1) and type 2 (DIO2) genes that potentially alter thyroid hormone bioactivity may help in elucidating the role of thyroid function in AD. Objective: We investigated the association of recently identified polymorphisms in the DIO1 (D1a-C/T, D1b-A/G) and DIO2 (D2-ORFa-Gly3Asp, D2-Thr92Ala) genes with circulating thyroid parameters and early neuroimaging markers of AD. Design and Participants: The Rotterdam Scan Study is a population-based cohort study among 1,077 elderly individuals aged 60-90 yr. Main Outcome Measures: DIO1 and DIO2 polymorphisms and serum TSH, free T-4, T-3, and reverse T-3 (rT(3)) levels were determined in 995 nondemented elderly, including 473 persons with assessments of hippocampal and amygdalar volume on brain magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Carriers of the D1a-T allele had higher serum free T-4 and rT(3), lower T-3, and lower T-3/rT(3). The D1b-G allele was associated with higher serum T-3 and T-3/rT(3). The DIO2 variants were not associated with serum thyroid parameters. No associations were found with hippocampal or amygdalar volume. Conclusion: This is the first study to report an association of D1a-C/T and D1b-A/G polymorphisms with iodothyronine levels in the elderly. Polymorphisms in the DIO1 and DIO2 genes are not associated with early magnetic resonance imaging markers of AD. This suggests that the previously reported association between iodothyronine levels and brain atrophy reflects comorbidity or nonthyroidal illness rather than thyroid hormones being involved in developing AD.

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