4.5 Article

A sequence variation in the MOG gene is involved in multiple sclerosis susceptibility in Italy

期刊

GENES AND IMMUNITY
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 7-15

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.gene.6364437

关键词

MS; MOG; HLA; genetic association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several studies suggest that the histocompatibility complex (HLA) class I region harbours genes modulating multiple sclerosis (MS) susceptibility independently from the effect of class II alleles. A candidate gene in this region is MOG, encoding the myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein. A significant association with the missense variation V142L (rs2857766) was previously reported in a small sample of 50 Italian MS patients. We confirmed this result in two independent Italian sample sets consisting of 878 MS patients and 890 matched controls (P = 6.6 x 10(-4)) and 246 trio families (P = 1.5 x 10(-3)). The comparison of genotype frequencies suggested a dominant-protective effect of L142. In the combined sample sets L142 conferred an odds ratio (OR) = 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60-0.82) that remained similar after accounting for HLA-DRB1*15 carrier status. The association with MOG V142L was still significant after conditioning for all DRB1 alleles (P = 0.035). Eleven additional single nucleotide polymorphisms in the MOG gene (namely - 1077T/C, -910T/C, -875A/G, -93T/C, S5S, Indel L22, V145I, +814C/T, +900A/G, +1024A/T, +1059C/T), two microsatellites in the MOG 5' flanking (MOGCA) and 3' untranslated (MOGTAAA) regions and four microsatellites in the HLA-class I region, from HLA-B to HFE, (namely MIB, D6S265, D6S1683 and D6S2239) were tested by transmission disequilibrium test in 199 trio families. None of these polymorphisms or of their haplotypic combinations showed a significant transmission distortion, in the absence of V142L. In conclusion, MOG V142L, or an untested variant in tight-linkage disequilibrium with it, is an independent MS susceptibility-modulating factor in the HLA class I region.

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

4.5
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