Key result
Chromosome 4q25 rs2200733 TT genotype is linked to ~2.5-fold higher risk of lone AF.
Why the study?
Does the TT genotype of the rs2200733 polymorphism on chromosome 4q25 increase the risk of lone atrial fibrillation in a Russian population?
Case-Control (n=149)
Does the TT genotype of the rs2200733 polymorphism on chromosome 4q25 increase the risk of lone atrial fibrillation in a Russian population?
The rs2200733 polymorphism on chromosome 4q25 is a genetic predictor associated with increased susceptibility to lone atrial fibrillation in the Russian population.
Supports rs2200733 TT genotyping for lone AF risk stratification in Russians; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most prevalent tachiarrhythmias, with at date non fully understood etiology. Recently, the attention is paid to genetic determinants of AF. Aim. To assess the role of rs2200733 polymorhpism on the chromosome 4q25 in development of AF in Russian population. Material and methods . Totally, 76 patients studied with AF, and control group, number 73 persons without cardiovascular pathology. All participants underwent laboratory and genetic investigations. Results. A statistically significant prevalence of genotype ТТ is found (21,21% vs 4,11%, р=0,015) and allele Т (34,85% vs 19,86%, р=0,03) in the group of patients with the lone AF comparing to the controls. Therefore, TT genotype and T allele of rs2200733 chromosome 4q25 could be predictors of unknown origin AF development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Va et al. (2016) conducted a case-control in Atrial Fibrillation (n=149). rs2200733 chromosome 4q25 polymorphism (TT genotype / T allele) vs. Other genotypes (CC or CT) was evaluated on Development of lone atrial fibrillation (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-19.5, p=0.015). The TT genotype of the rs2200733 polymorphism on chromosome 4q25 was significantly associated with an increased risk of lone atrial fibrillation (OR 2.5).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: