4.7 Article

Polymorphisms in the promoter regions of MMP-2, MMP-3, MMP-9 and MMP-12 genes as determinants of aneurysmal coronary artery disease

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01909-5

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES Our hypothesis was that functional polymorphisms in matrix metalloprotemase (MMP) genes may act as susceptibility factors for the development of coronary aneurysms (CAs). BACKGROUND Different forms of remodeling have been described at the level of coronary arteries; CA, reported in 1% to 5% of patients with anglographic evidence of coronary artery disease (CAD), are one of them. Matrix metalloproteinases have been implicated in the pathogenesis of aneurysm development through increased proteolysis of extracellular matrix proteins. METHODS We screened 3,862 patients who underwent coronary angiography and identified 113 patients with CAD with at least one CA (CA group); these patients were matched with 226 patients with CAD without CA (control group). The - 1,306 C/T MMP-2, 5A/6A MMP-3, CA-repeat MMP-9 and -82 A/G MMP-12 polymorphisms were determined. RESULTS The MMP-2, MMP-9 and MMP-12 polymorphisms were not associated with CA. By contrast, the 5A/5A genotype of MMP-3 was significantly more frequent in the CA group than in the control group (31% vs. 18%, p = 0.015); similarly, the MMP-3 5A allele was more frequent in the CA group (p = 0.009). Three variables were independently associated with CA: the MMP-3 5A/5A genotype (odds ratio [OR] 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.27 to 3.93]), a previous myocardial infarction (OR 1.91, 95% CI [1.14 to 3.20]) and a history of aortic aneurysm (OR = 21.06, 95% CI [2.35 to 188]). CONCLUSIONS The MMP-3 5A allele is associated with the occurrence of CA. Our results suggest that an increased proteolysis in the arterial wall may act as a susceptibility factor for the development of CA inpatients with coronary atherosclerosis. (C) 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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