4.7 Article

TCF7L2 Variation and Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy

期刊

DIABETES
卷 62, 期 7, 页码 2613-2617

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db12-1093

关键词

-

资金

  1. 973 Program [2011CB510200, 2013CB967504]
  2. National Institutes of Health [EY018660, EY021374, EY019270, EY014428)]
  3. King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology
  4. University of California, San Diego, Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine
  5. Burroughs Wellcome Fund Clinical Scientist Award in Translational Research
  6. Research to Prevent Blindness
  7. Clinical and Translational Research Institute [1TL1RR031979-01]
  8. Cancer Training Grant [T32 CA009523]
  9. VA Merit Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is the most severe vision-threatening complication of diabetes. For investigation of genetic association between TCF7L2 and PDR in Caucasian type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and its functional consequences, 383 T2DM patients with PDR (T2DM-PDR) and 756 T2DM patients without diabetic retinopathy (T2DM-no DR) were genotyped with rs7903146 in TCF7L2. We found that risk allele (T) frequency of rs7903146 was significantly higher in T2DM-PDR patients (allelic P = 2.52E-04). In lymphoblastoid cells induced to undergo endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress by treatment of tunicamycin, higher fold change of TCF7L2 and VEGFA mRNA levels were observed in rs7903146-TT cells than in rs7903146-CC cells (P = 0.02 for TCF7L2; P = 0.004 for VEGFA), suggesting that ER stress plays a role in PDR pathogenesis. Silencing TCF7L2 resulted in decreased mRNA levels of both TCF7L2 and VEGFA (P < 0.001). Retinas of oxygen-induced retinopathy mice (a model for PDR) had higher TCF7L2 and VEGFA mRNA levels than those of controls (P = 2.9E-04 for TCF7L2; P = 1.9E-07 for VEGFA). Together, data from our study show that TCF7L2-rs7903146 is associated with PDR in Caucasian T2DM and suggest that TCF7L2 promotes pathological retinal neovascularization via ER stress-dependent upregulation of VEGFA.

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