4.3 Article

Gene-environment interaction in atopic diseases: a population-based twin study of early-life exposures

期刊

CLINICAL RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 79-86

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/crj.12110

关键词

asthma; environment; genetics; twin tudy

资金

  1. Lundbeck Foundation [R163-2013-16235] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IntroductionThe development of atopic diseases early in life suggests an important role of perinatal risk factors. ObjectivesTo study whether early-life exposures modify the genetic influence on atopic diseases in a twin population. MethodsQuestionnaire data on atopic diseases from 850 monozygotic and 2279 like-sex dizygotic twin pairs, 3-9 years of age, from the Danish Twin Registry were cross-linked with data on prematurity, Cesarean section, maternal age at birth, parental cohabitation, season of birth and maternal smoking during pregnancy, from the Danish National Birth Registry. Significant predictors of atopic diseases were identified with logistic regression and subsequently tested for genetic effect modification using variance components analysis. ResultsAfter multivariable adjustment, prematurity (gestational age below 32 weeks) [odds ratio (OR)=1.93, confidence interval (CI)=1.45-2.56], Cesarean section (OR=1.25, CI=1.05-1.49) and maternal smoking during pregnancy (OR=1.70, CI=1.42-2.04) significantly influenced the risk of asthma, whereas none of the factors were significantly associated with atopic dermatitis and hay fever. Variance components analysis stratified by exposure status showed no significant change in the heritability of asthma according to the identified risk factors. ConclusionIn this population-based study of children, there was no evidence of genetic effect modification of atopic diseases by several identified early-life risk factors. The causal relationship between these risk factors and atopic diseases may therefore be mediated via mechanisms different from gene-environment interaction.

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

4.3
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