| Objective To determine whether PON1 rs662、rs854560、TNF-α rs 1800629、IL-6 rs 1800795 confer susceptibility to human longevity, provides genetic data for the molecular mechanism of aging research and treatment of age-related diseases.Methods Case control studies according to the correlation between gene Polymorphism ofPON1 rs662、rs854560、IL-6 rs1800795、TNF-a rs 1800629 and the risk for longevity were comprehensively searched. Statistical analysis gene type and gene frequencies by Stata/SE software 9.0, alculating the pooled OR and its 95%CI in several analyses of subgroup.Results The meta-analysis of the PON1 rs662:(additive model) OR= 1.080,95%CI= 0.989-1.179, P=0.088; (dominant model) OR=1.099,95%CI=0.975-1.240, P= 0.124; (recessive model)OR= 1.102,95%CI=0.947-1.283, P=0.210; when age≥93, (additive model)OR=1.025,95%CI=0.939-1.119, P=0.580; (dominant model) OR=1.034,95% CI=0.904-1.182, P=0.625; (recessive model) OR=1.044,95%CI=0.880-1.239, P=0.622.PON1 rs854560:(additive model):OR=0.946,95%CI= 0.862-1.039, P=0.245; (dominant model)OR=0.951,95%CI=0.836-1.081, P=0.442; (recessive model) OR= 0.887,95%CI=0.731-1.077, P=0.225; when age≥93, (additive model)OR=1.071, 95%CI=0.951-0.845, P=0.408; (dominant model) OR=0.977,95%CI=0.830-1.151, P=0.783; (recessive model) OR=0.839,95%CI=0.612-1.152, P=0.278.TNF-a rs1800629:(additive model)OR=0.98,95%CI=0.79-1.22, P=0.852; (dominant model)OR=0.97,95%CI=0.75-1.24, P=0.791; (recessive model) OR= 1.061, 95%CI=0.507-2.217, P=0.876; when age≥90, (additive model)OR=0.920 95%CI=0.699-1.211, P=0.554; (dominant model) OR=0.899,95%CI=0.661-1.222, P=0.496; (recessive model) OR=1.069,95%CI=0.297-3.844, P=0.918; subgroup analysis in male, whenage≥80, (additive model)OR=0.930,95%CI=0.580-1.480, P=0.792; (dominant model) OR=0.928,95%CI=0.578-1.490, P=0.758; (recessive model) OR=1.312,95%CI=0.266-6.482, P=0.739.IL-6 rs1800795:(additive model)OR=1.068,95%CI=0.918-1.243, P=0.396; (dominant model)OR=1.089,95%CI=0.929-1.277, P=0.292; (recessive model) OR= 1.026,95%CI=0.818-1.288, P=0.824; when age≥90, (additive model)OR=1.097, 95%CI=0.842-1.427, P=0.494; when age≥90 male, (dominant model) OR=1.083,95%CI =0.803-1.460, P=0.601; subgroup analysis in male, when age>80, OR=1.083, 95%CI=0.803-1.460, P=0.601; when age≥90 female, (dominant model) OR=1.156, 95%CI=0.932-1.434, P=0.187; when age≥100, (additive model) OR=1.244, 95%CI=0.998-1.550, P=0.052; (dominant model) OR=1.276,95%CI=0.941-1.732, P=0.117; (recessive model) OR= 1.511,95%CI=0.864-2.641, P=0.148; when age≥ 100 male, (dominant model)OR=0.70,95%CI=0.35-1.38, P=0.30; subgroup analysis in Italian male, whenage≥100, OR=2.02,95%CI=1.25-3.26, P=0.004.Conclusion PON1 rs662、rs854560、TNF-a rs1 800629 and IL-6 rs1800795 showed no significant association with longevity in Caucasians, but a significant change was observed in association of longevity with IL-6 G174C polymorphic in Italian male. The findings could be under the influence of genes and gene and environment interactions, other factors including gender, geographic gradient, geographical location, the Mediterranean diet, exercise can control humans reached the limit of life, needs more data to further explain the relationship between PON1 rs662、rs854560、TNF-a rs1800629、IL-6 rs1800795 and humans longevity.Objective To determine whether PON1 rs854560 confer susceptibility to CHD in Chinese population of Yunnan Province, and provide early diagnosis and treatment of coronary heart disease with genetic data.Methods A total of 131 coronary heart disease patients were selected between 2012 and 2015 of these CHD patients in Chinese population of Yunnan Province, The control group is consisted of 305 subjects, age>45 year. Human genome DNA was extracted and identified gene type by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight, MALDI-TOF. Statistical analyses were executed using SPSS 20.0 softwar.Results 1.When we adjusted for confounding factors by logistic regression, ML vs. LL model, OR=1.049,95%CI=0.477-2.295, P=0.881; MM vs. LL model, OR=0.815, 95%CI=0.071-27.16, P=0.816; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=1.013,95%CI: 0.468-2.204, P=0.9781.1 In smokers group, ML vs. LL model, OR=0.821,95%CI=0.260-2.625, P=0.718; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=0.821,95% CI=0.260-2.625, P=0.718; In non-smokers group, ML vs. LL model, OR=1.253,95 %CI=0.433-3.627, P=0.679; MM vs. LL model, OR=1.202,95%CI=0.067-29.517, P=0.967; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=1.170,95%CI=0.418-3.366, P=0.778.1.2 In coronary heart disease (CHD) group, CHD+DM+vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=2.566,95%CI=0.855-8.560, P=0.171; MM vs. LL model, OR=4.693, 95%CI=0.161-116.397, P=0.385; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=2.454,95% CI=0.773-7.880, P=0.178. CHD+DM-vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=0.765, 95%CI=0.310-1.942, P=0.577; MM vs. LL model, OR=0.855,95%CI=0.054-21.067, P-0.912; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=0.748,95%CI=0.278-1.840, P=0.509. DM+ vs.DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=3.263,95%CI=0.830-13.424, P=0.089; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=3.263,95%CI=0.830-13.424, P=0.089.1.3 In non-smokers group, DM+vs. DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=2.533,95% CI=0.378-16.708, P=0.354; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=2.533,95%CI=0.378-16.708, P=0.354. CHD+DM+vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=2.381,95%CI=0.491-11.699, P=0.296; MM vs. LL model, OR=5.547,95%CI=O.257-138.059, P=0.332; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=2.224, 95%CI=0.455-10.856, P=0.777. CHD+DM-vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=0.952,95%CI=0.363-3.454, P=0.945; MM vs. LL model, OR=1.449,95% CI=0.159-36.644, P=0.825; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=0.889,95%CI=0.257-3.200, P=0.817.In smokers group, DM+vs. DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=4.669,95% CI=0.673-32.360, P=0.169; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=4.669,95%CI=0.673-32.360, P=0.169. CHD+DM+vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=2.564,95%CI=0.461-14.184, P=0.280; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=2.563,95%CI=0.461-14.184, P=0.280. CHD+ DM-vs. CHD-DM-:ML vs. LL model, OR=0.549,95%CI=0.144-2.161, P=0.393; MM vs. LL model, invalid comparison; MM+ML vs. LL model, OR=0.549,95% CI=0.144-2.161, P=0.393.2. The frequency distribution of PoN1 gene rs854560 locus polymorphism in healthy young and CHD group compared:genotypes between the two groups no significant difference, X2=0.452, P=0.789; alleles between the two groups no significant difference, X2=0.007, OR=0.969,95%CI=0.457-2.065, P=0.934.2.1 In smokers group, genotypes:X2=0.904, P=0.636; alleles:X2=0.134, OR=0.808,95%CI=0.258-2.527, P=0.714. In non-smokers group, genotypes:X2=0.464, P=0.793; alleles:X2=0.026, OR=1.087,95%CI=0.390-3.029, P=0.873.2.2 In CHD group, DM+vs. DM-, genotypes:X2=3.400, P=0.065; alleles: X2=3.265, OR=3.152,95%CI=0.854-11.637, P=0.071; CHD+DM+vs. CHD-DM-, genotypes:X2=2.797, P=0.247; alleles:X2=2.113, OR=2.220,95%CI=0.737-6.681, P=0.146; CHD+DM-vs. CHD-DM-, genotypes:X2=0.683, P=0.711; alleles:X2=0.577, OR=0.704,95%CI=0.284-1.747, P=0.447.2.3 In non-smokers group, CHD+DM+vs. CHD+DM-, genotypes:X2=0.944, P=0.331; alleles: X2=0.904, OR=2.385, 95% CI=0.378-15.034, P=0.342. CHD+DM+ vs. CHD- DM-, genotypes: X2=1.278, P=0.528; alleles: X2=0.815, OR=1.99,95 % CI=0.434-9.123, P=0.367; CHD+DM-vs. CHD-DM-, genotypes: X2=0.23, P=0.892; alleles: X2=0.08, OR=0.835, 95% CI=0.238-2.923, P=0.777.2.4 In smokers group, CHD+DM+vs. CHD+DM-, genotypes: X2=2.83, P=0.093; alleles: X2=2.747, OR=4.259, 95% CI=0.665-27.275, P=0.099; CHD+DM+vs. CHD-DM-, genotypes: X2=1.235, P=0.267; alleles: X2=1.170, OR=2.389,95% CI=0.471-12.117, P=0.279; CHD+DM-vs. CHD-DM-, genotypes: X2=0.754, P=0.385; alleles: X2=0.725, OR=0.561, 95% CI=0.146-2.159, P=0.394.Conclusion PON1 rs854560 polymorphisms is not associated with coronary heart disease in Chinese YunNan population. Results may be affected by other unknown complex factors and the sample size of study, we need more research data to explain the relationship between PON1 rs854560 and the risk of cardiovascular disease. |
PDF Full Text Request