4.8 Article

Cytochrome p450 2E1 genotype and the susceptibility to antituberculosis drug-induced hepatitis

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 37, 期 4, 页码 924-930

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO
DOI: 10.1053/jhep.2003.50144

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most cases with antituberculosis drug-induced hepatitis have been attributed to isoniazid. Isoniazid is metabolized by hepatic N-acetyltransferase (NAT) and cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1) to form hepatotoxins. However, the role of CYP2E1 in this hepatotoxicity has not yet been reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the polymorphism of the CYP2E1 gene is associated with antituberculosis drug induced hepatitis. A total of 318 tuberculosis patients who received antituberculosis treatment were followed prospectively. Their CYP2E1 and NAT2 genotypes were determined using a polymerase chain reaction with restriction fragment length polymorphism method. Twenty-one healthy volunteers were recruited for CYP2E1 phenotype study using a chlorzoxazone test. Forty-nine (15.4%) patients were diagnosed to have drug-induced hcpatotoxicity. Patients with homozygous wild genotype CYP2E1 c1/c1 had a higher risk of hepatotoxicity (20.0%; odds ratio [OR], 2.52) than those with mutant allele c2 (CYP2E1 c1/c2 or c2/c2, 9.0%, P = .009). If CYP2E1 c1/c2 or c2/c2 genotype combined with rapid acetylator status was regarded as the reference group, the risk of hepatotoxicity increased from 3.94 for CYP2E1 c1/c1 with rapid acetylator status to 7.43 for CYP2E1 c1/c1 with slow acetylator status. After adjustment for acetylator status and age, the CYP2E1 c1/c1 genotype remained an independent risk factor for hepatotoxicity (OR, 2.38; P = .017). Furthermore, under the administration of isoniazid, the volunteers with CYP2E1 c1/c1 genotype had higher CYP2E1 activity than those with other genotypes had and, hence, might produce more hepatotoxins. In conclusion, CYP 2E1 genetic polymorphism may be associated with susceptibility to antituberculosis drug-induced hepatitis.

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

4.8
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