Why the study?
Does the KCNQ1 rs2074238 T-allele polymorphism reduce the risk of cardiac events in patients with Long-QT syndrome?
Does the KCNQ1 rs2074238 T-allele polymorphism reduce the risk of cardiac events in patients with Long-QT syndrome?
The KCNQ1 rs2074238 T-allele is a protective genetic modifier that reduces the risk of cardiac events in patients with Long-QT syndrome, aiding in risk stratification.
Supports LQTS risk stratification by KCNQ1 genotype; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: Long-QT syndrome (LQTS) is characterized by such striking clinical heterogeneity that, even among family members carrying the same mutation, clinical outcome can range between sudden death and no symptoms. We investigated the role of genetic variants as modifiers of risk for cardiac events in patients with LQTS. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a matched case-control study including 112 patient duos with LQTS from France, Italy, and Japan, 25 polymorphisms were genotyped based on either their association with QTc duration in healthy populations or on their role in adrenergic responses. The duos were composed of 2 relatives harboring the same heterozygous KCNQ1 or KCNH2 mutation: 1 with cardiac events and 1 asymptomatic and untreated. The findings were then validated in 2 independent founder populations totaling 174 symptomatic and 162 asymptomatic patients with LQTS, and a meta-analysis was performed. The KCNQ1 rs2074238 T-allele was significantly associated with a decreased risk of symptoms 0.34 (0.19-0.61; P<0.0002) and with shorter QTc (P<0.0001) in the combined discovery and replication cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence that the KCNQ1 rs2074238 polymorphism is an independent risk modifier with the minor T-allele conferring protection against cardiac events in patients with LQTS. This finding is a step toward a novel approach for risk stratification in patients with LQTS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duchatelet et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: