3.8 Article

Glutathione-S-transferase M1 M3, P1 and T1 polymorphisms and severity of lung disease in children with cystic fibrosis

期刊

PHARMACOGENETICS
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 295-301

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00008571-200405000-00004

关键词

cystic fibrosis; oxidative stress; polymorphism; glutathione-S-transferase; paediatrics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Progression and severity of lung disease differs markedly and early between patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). We investigated the hypothesis that polymorphisms in the detoxifying enzymes glutathione-S-transferase (GST) could influence phenotypic presentation of lung disease in CF. Methods Genotypes for GSTM1, GSTM3, GSTP1 and GSTT1 were determined in a cohort of 146 children with CF by PCR-based methods. Pulmonary function, assessed by spirometric measures of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC), was analysed in children at the age of 9. Results No association between spirometric measurements, and GSTM1, GSTP1 or GSTT1 genotypes was found. As compared with patients homozygous for GSTM3*A allele, CF children carrying the GSTM3*B allele displayed a significant better lung function, assessed by both mean values of FEV1 and of FVC (respectively P = 0.01 and P = 0.002). These correlations remained significant after adjustment for potential confounding factors (respectively adjusted P = 0.008 and P = 0.002) and also in subgroups of CF patients who carry the DeltaF508 CFTR mutation. Haplotype analysis of GSTM3 in combination with GSTM1 indicated that the positive impact of GSTM3*B allele on pulmonary performances was barely influenced by the GSTM1 genotypes of CF children. Conclusions These data provide the first evidence suggesting that polymorphism of the GSTM3 gene contributes to clinical severity in CF, which may have prognostic significance and could prompt to start a more targeted therapy in young patients with CF. (C) 2004 Lippincott Williams Wilkins.

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

3.8
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