ArticleHuman genomics2016
Genetic risk factors for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in Kazakh population.
Article in Human genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Variants in PHACTR1 & LPL Mediate Restenosis Risk in Coronary Artery Patients.Vascular health and risk management · 2023Article
- In-stent restenosis in acute coronary syndrome-a classic and a machine learning approach.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Association of polymorphisms in TP53 and the promoter region of IL10 with gastric cancer in a Kazakh population.Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter coronary stenting, the risk of developing restenosis is from 20 to 35 %. The aim of the present study is to investigate the association of genetic variation in candidate genes in patients diagnosed with restenosis in the Kazakh population.
methodsFour hundred fifty-nine patients were recruited to the study; 91 patients were also diagnosed with diabetes and were excluded from the sampling. DNA was extracted with the salting-out method. The patients were genotyped for 53 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Genotyping was performed on the QuantStudio 12K Flex (Life Technologies). Differences in distribution of BMI score among different genotype groups were compared by analysis of variance (ANOVA). Also, statistical analysis was performed using R and PLINK v.1.07. Haplotype frequencies and LD measures were estimated by using the software Haploview 4.2.
resultsA logistic regression analysis found a significant difference in restenosis rates for different genotypes. FGB (rs1800790) is significantly associated with restenosis after stenting (OR = 2.924, P = 2.3E-06, additive model) in the Kazakh population. CD14 (rs2569190) showed a significant association in the additive (OR = 0.08033, P = 2.11E-09) and dominant models (OR = 0.05359, P = 4.15E-11). NOS3 (rs1799983) was also highly associated with development of restenosis after stenting in additive (OR = 20.05, P = 2.74 E-12) and recessive models (OR = 22.24, P = 6.811E-10).
conclusionsOur results indicate that FGB (rs1800790), CD14 (rs2569190), and NOS3 (rs1799983) SNPs could be genetic markers for development of restenosis in Kazakh population. Adjustment for potential confounder factor BMI gave almost the same results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.