4.0 Article

Association of SLC6A12 variants with aspirin-intolerant asthma in a Korean population

期刊

ANNALS OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 74, 期 -, 页码 326-334

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2010.00584.x

关键词

Aspirin-intolerant asthma; SLC6A12; polymorphism; haplotype

资金

  1. Korea Health 21 RD Project [A010249]
  2. Korea government (MEST) [2009-0080157]
  3. Korea National Institute of Health [4800-4845-300-260-00]
  4. Sogang University [200810021.01]
  5. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2009-0093822]
  6. [M1-0302-00-0073]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Aspirin-intolerant asthma (AIA) occurs from asthma exacerbation after exposure to aspirin. However, the underlying mechanisms of AIA occurrence are still unclear. The critical role of the solute carrier family 6 (neurotransmitter transporter, betaine/GABA) member 12 (SLC6A12) gene in GABAergic transmission, which is associated with mucus production in asthma, makes it a candidate gene for AIA association study. Eight single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in SLC6A12 were genotyped in 163 aspirin-intolerant asthma (AIA) and 429 aspirin-tolerant asthma (ATA) patients of Korean ethnicity. Associations between polymorphisms of SLC6A12 and AIA were analysed using multivariate logistic analysis. Results showed that two polymorphisms and a haplotype in SLC6A12, rs499368 (P = 0.005; Pcorr = 0.03), rs557881 (non-synonymous C10R, P = 0.007; Pcorr = 0.04), and SLC6A12_BL1_ht1 (P = 0.009; Pcorr = 0.05) respectively, were significantly associated with AIA after multiple testing corrections. In addition, SNPs of SLC6A12 were significantly associated with the fall rate of FEV(1) by aspirin provocation suggesting that SLC6A12 could affect reversibility of lung function abnormalities in AIA patients. Although these results are preliminary and future replications are needed to confirm these findings, this study showed evidence of association between variants in SLC6A12 and AIA occurrence among asthmatics in a Korean population.

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

4.0
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