4.6 Article

Autism Spectrum Disorder Interaction of Air Pollution with the MET Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Gene

期刊

EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 44-47

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000030

关键词

-

资金

  1. South Coast Air Quality Management District, a California state regulatory agency
  2. BP
  3. Autism Speaks
  4. NIEHS [ES019002, ES013578, ES007048, ES11269, ES015359, ES016535, ES011627]
  5. EPA Star-R [823392, 833292]
  6. MIND Institute
  7. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [R01ES015359, P01ES011269, P30ES007048, R21ES019002, P01ES011627, R01ES016535] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  8. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH100172] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Independent studies report association of autism spectrum disorder with air pollution exposure and a functional promoter variant (rs1858830) in the MET receptor tyrosine kinase (MET) gene. Toxicological data find altered brain Met expression in mice after prenatal exposure to a model air pollutant. Our objective was to investigate whether air pollution exposure and MET rs1858830 genotype interact to alter the risk of autism spectrum disorder. Methods: We studied 252 cases of autism spectrum disorder and 156 typically developing controls from the Childhood Autism Risk from Genetics and the Environment Study. Air pollution exposure was assigned for local traffic-related sources and regional sources (particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone). MET genotype was determined by direct resequencing. Results: Subjects with both MET rs1858830 CC genotype and high air pollutant exposures were at increased risk of autism spectrum disorder compared with subjects who had both the CG/GG genotypes and lower air pollutant exposures. There was evidence of multiplicative interaction between NO2 and MET CC genotype (P= 0.03). Conclusions:MET rs1858830 CC genotype and air pollutant exposure may interact to increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder.

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

4.6
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