Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Abstract Background: This study aimed to assess the association between PPARγ gene polymorphism and susceptibility to Parkinson’s disease (PD) in a northern Chinese population. Methods : We conducted a case-control study which including 391 outpatients with PD and 391 healthy matched individuals. All subject genotypes on PPARγ gene in rs3856806, rs1801282, -1279G/A were determined by polymerase chain reaction and restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) analysis. Results : Our results showed participants with AG and AG+AA (dorminant model) genotypes of -1279G/A had a higher genetic risk of PD compared to those with GG ( p = 0.024, OR = 1.781, 95% CI = 1.073-2.956; p = 0.024,OR = 1.768, 95% CI = 1.078-2.898). A allele of the -1279G/A polymorphism was presumably correlated with increased risk of PD ( p = 0.037,OR = 1.639, 95% CI = 1.027-2.616) and male PD ( p =0.032, OR = 1.998, 95% CI = 1.051-3.798) as well as early-onset Parkinson’s disease (EOPD)( p =0.019, OR = 2.667, 95% CI = 1.263-5.629). Stratification analysis by age for rs1801282 indicated a significant genotype difference between EOPD and controls( p =0.005) as well as late-onset Parkinson’s disease(LOPD) and controls( p =0.008). G allele frequency of rs1801282 in EOPD subjects was significantly higher than it in controls( p = 0.006, OR =3.093, 95% CI = 1.446-6.615) and LOPD ( p = 0.009, OR =2.899, 95% CI = 1.344-6.253). Conclusions : The study showed that in a northern Chinese population, the A allele of -1279G/A might be a risk factor for PD and the G alle of rs1801282 might increase the susceptibility of EOPD.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.