4.7 Article

The association between transforming growth factor β3 polymorphisms and left ventricular structure in hypertensive subjects

期刊

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 411, 期 7-8, 页码 558-562

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2010.01.014

关键词

Left ventricular structure; Transforming growth factor beta; Genetic polymorphism; Hypertension

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai Municipality [02Z B14080]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) may be a crucial regulator of cardiac remodeling. We investigated the association between the TGF-beta gene polymorphisms and left ventricular structure. Methods: A total of 658 hypertensive subjects were genotyped for the TGF-beta 1 T869C and TGF-beta 3 (rs3917187 and rs4252338) polymorphisms. Results: TGF-beta 3 rs3917187 AA homozygotes had, while accounting for covariates, greater left ventricular end-systolic (LVESD, P=0.004) and end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD, P=0.007) than G allele carriers. Moreover, left ventricular mass index (LVMI) in AA genotype was 123.0 +/- 3.1 g/m(2) significantly higher than that in AG (114.6 +/- 1.6 g/m(2)) and GG (115.4 +/- 2.1 g/m(2), P=0.03) genotypes. In multivariate regression analysis, TGF-beta 3 rs3917187 genotype as an independent predictor had statistically significant effects on LVESD (beta=0.164, P=0.002), LVEDD (beta=0.172, P=0.003) and LVMI (beta=0.136, P=0.016), respectively. In further analyses, we observed a significant interaction between the rs3917187 and alcohol intake in relation to LVESD (P-int=0.04) and left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFSH, P-int=0.012). However, no relationship could be found between left ventricular parameters and the T869C or the rs4252338. Conclusion: The present results demonstrated that the TGF-beta 3 rs3917187 polymorphism was associated with left ventricular structure, and had an interactive influence with alcohol on LVESD and LVFSH in hypertensive subjects. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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