Protein Depp
Introduction
Section titled “Introduction”Proteins are fundamental macromolecules essential for virtually every process within living organisms, from catalyzing metabolic reactions and replicating DNA to transporting molecules and providing structural support. Understanding the genetic factors that influence protein levels and function is a critical area of research, often explored through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) that identify protein quantitative trait loci (pQTLs). [1]These pQTLs represent specific genetic variants, typically single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), that are associated with variations in the abundance or activity of proteins. The study ofprotein depp contributes to this broader effort to elucidate the complex interplay between an individual’s genetic makeup and their proteomic profile.
Biological Basis
Section titled “Biological Basis”The production and regulation of proteins are intricately controlled by an individual’s genome. Genetic variations, such as SNPs, can influence protein levels by affecting gene transcription, mRNA stability, translation efficiency, or protein degradation. For example, some SNPs can be located within the gene encoding a protein or in regulatory regions nearby, impacting its expression, thereby influencing circulating protein concentrations. [1] Research has demonstrated that such genetic variants can significantly explain a portion of the observed variance of certain protein and metabolite concentrations. [2] This genetic influence highlights how an individual’s unique DNA sequence contributes to their specific proteomic landscape.
Clinical Relevance
Section titled “Clinical Relevance”Variations in protein levels are often implicated in health and disease, serving as important biomarkers for various conditions. For instance, studies have identified genetic associations with inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein (CRP), which is linked to early diabetogenesis and atherogenesis.[3]Other proteins, including inflammatory cytokines such as interleukins, insulin, chemokines, adipokines (e.g., adiponectin, leptin, resistin), and liver function markers, are known to be implicated in metabolic and inflammatory conditions, diabetes, and HIV progression.[1]Similarly, genetic factors influencing hemostatic factors, hematological phenotypes[4]and lipid levels (e.g., HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol) are crucial for understanding cardiovascular disease risk.[5] Investigations into protein depp are therefore pertinent to identifying potential genetic predispositions or indicators for various clinical outcomes.
Social Importance
Section titled “Social Importance”The identification of genetic determinants for protein levels, including those affecting protein depp, holds significant social importance. Such findings can advance personalized medicine by enabling earlier risk stratification, targeted preventive strategies, and the development of novel therapeutic interventions based on an individual’s genetic profile. By unraveling the genetic architecture underlying protein variations, researchers can gain deeper insights into disease mechanisms, ultimately leading to improved diagnostics and more effective treatments for common and complex diseases.
Limitations
Section titled “Limitations”The interpretation of findings for protein depp, derived from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and similar large-scale genetic analyses, is subject to several important limitations. These constraints arise from the inherent design of such studies, the characteristics of the cohorts examined, and the persistent complexities of human genetic architecture. Recognizing these limitations is crucial for a balanced understanding of the research value and for guiding future investigations.
Methodological and Statistical Constraints
Section titled “Methodological and Statistical Constraints”Studies on protein depp, like many genome-wide association efforts, often contend with methodological and statistical limitations that can impact the reliability and completeness of findings. The moderate sample sizes typical of some cohorts may lead to insufficient statistical power, increasing the risk of false negative findings where genuine, but modest, genetic associations with protein depp are undetected.[6] Conversely, the vast number of statistical tests performed across the genome introduces a significant multiple testing problem, heightening the potential for false positive associations if p-values are not rigorously adjusted, as highlighted by instances requiring Bonferroni correction for global significance. [6] This dual challenge of potential false negatives and false positives necessitates cautious interpretation and prioritization of identified genetic variants.
Furthermore, the genomic coverage provided by the SNP arrays used in these studies can be a limiting factor in fully characterizing the genetic landscape of protein depp. Using only a subset of all available SNPs, or older array versions, means that some genes or specific genetic variants may not be adequately represented, potentially causing important associations to be missed due to lack of coverage.[4]This incomplete genomic representation can hinder a comprehensive investigation of candidate genes, preventing a full understanding of their contribution to protein depp and underscoring the need for more dense SNP arrays or imputation methods to improve coverage.[4]
Generalizability and Phenotypic Assessment Nuances
Section titled “Generalizability and Phenotypic Assessment Nuances”A significant limitation for understanding protein depp broadly relates to the generalizability of findings, primarily due to the demographic characteristics of study populations. Many of the initial GWAS efforts predominantly involve individuals of European or Caucasian ancestry, which can restrict the direct applicability of identified genetic associations to diverse global populations.[7] Genetic variations, allele frequencies, and linkage disequilibrium patterns can differ substantially across ethnic groups, meaning that findings from one population may not translate directly to others and necessitate replication in multi-ethnic cohorts.
Phenotypic assessment also presents specific challenges that can influence the robustness of genetic associations with protein depp. Traits like protein levels often exhibit non-normal distributions, requiring complex statistical transformations (e.g., log, Box-Cox, or probit transformations) to meet the assumptions of association tests, which could subtly influence the results and their interpretation.[1]Additionally, study designs that perform only sex-pooled analyses, while simplifying statistical complexity, risk overlooking SNPs whose associations with protein depp might be exclusive to either males or females, thereby potentially obscuring important sex-specific genetic effects.[4]
Replication and Unexplained Genetic Contributions
Section titled “Replication and Unexplained Genetic Contributions”A fundamental aspect of validating genetic associations for protein depp is the requirement for replication in independent cohorts. The initial findings from genome-wide screens are considered exploratory, and their ultimate validation and establishment as true genetic associations are contingent upon successful replication in distinct populations.[6] Without such external validation, associations, even those with strong statistical support, remain tentative and require further confirmation to move beyond being potential false positives arising from multiple testing. This highlights the ongoing need for collaborative research and meta-analyses to build confidence in identified genetic links.
Finally, despite the successful identification of specific genetic loci influencing protein depp, a substantial portion of the trait’s heritability often remains unexplained, contributing to the “missing heritability” phenomenon. While studies endeavor to adjust for common environmental confounders like age and sex, the complex interplay of unmeasured environmental factors and intricate gene-environment interactions may not be fully captured. Furthermore, the genetic architecture of protein depp might involve numerous variants with very small effects, rare variants not covered by standard arrays, or complex pleiotropic effects, all of which contribute to the difficulty in fully accounting for the genetic determinants of the trait.[6] Further research employing denser genomic data, larger cohorts, and innovative analytical methods is essential to unravel these remaining knowledge gaps.
Variants
Section titled “Variants”Genetic variations within or near genes such as HRG, HRG-AS1, KNG1, and GALNT2 can significantly influence protein expression and function, a concept known as protein quantitative trait loci (pQTLs). [1]These variants, or single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), often modify gene activity through various mechanisms, including altering transcription, affecting mRNA stability, or impacting protein processing and post-translational modifications. Such alterations can lead to changes in circulating protein levels, which in turn affect a range of physiological processes and disease susceptibilities.[2]
The HRG(Histidine Rich Glycoprotein) gene encodes a plasma protein involved in diverse biological processes, including blood coagulation, fibrinolysis, angiogenesis, and immune responses, by binding to various ligands like heparin and metal ions. Variants such asrs7614709 , rs7625980 , rs16860992 , and rs186268843 , found within or near HRG and its antisense RNA HRG-AS1, may modulate the transcription or stability of HRG mRNA, thereby impacting the circulating levels of HRG protein. HRG-AS1 is an antisense RNA that can regulate the expression of HRGthrough complex mechanisms, including chromatin remodeling or direct interaction with mRNA transcripts. Consequently, these variants can alter the “protein depp” (protein levels and downstream effects) ofHRG, potentially influencing its critical roles in vascular health, wound healing, and immune regulation, with broader implications for overlapping traits related to cardiovascular and inflammatory conditions.
Variations in KNG1 (Kininogen 1), such as rs1621816 , are relevant to the kallikrein-kinin system, which plays a central role in inflammation, blood pressure regulation, and coagulation. KNG1 serves as a precursor for bradykinin, a potent vasodilator and inflammatory mediator. A variant like rs1621816 could influence the expression levels or processing of KNG1 protein, thereby altering the availability of kinins and affecting physiological pathways downstream. Changes in KNG1 protein levels, often due to regulatory variants, can impact the body’s inflammatory response, vascular tone, and clotting cascades, highlighting its importance in maintaining homeostatic balance. Understanding these genetic influences helps elucidate individual predispositions to conditions involving these pathways.
The GALNT2 gene (UDP-N-acetyl-alpha-D-galactosamine:polypeptide N-acetylgalactosaminyltransferase 2) is crucial for initiating mucin-type O-glycosylation, a widespread post-translational modification that attaches sugars to proteins. This process significantly affects protein stability, folding, secretion, and interactions with other molecules. The variant rs17315646 within GALNT2could influence the enzyme’s activity or expression, thereby altering the glycosylation patterns of numerous target proteins throughout the body. Such modifications can lead to altered protein function and stability, impacting their “protein depp” and potentially contributing to a range of traits from lipid metabolism to immune recognition. Alterations in O-glycosylation can be linked to various diseases, makingGALNT2 variants important modulators of complex biological systems.
Additional variants associated with HRG-AS1, including rs12490146 , rs73185681 , and rs7646890 (also linked to HRGP2), further underscore the regulatory complexity in this genomic region. These non-coding variants might affect the epigenetic landscape, enhancer activity, or microRNA binding sites within HRG-AS1, thus indirectly influencing the expression of neighboring genes like HRG or other functionally related proteins. The precise mechanisms through which these variants influence gene regulation can be complex, but their ultimate effect is often seen in altered protein production or function. Such genetic variations can contribute to subtle yet cumulative changes in protein levels and activity, impacting an individual’s health trajectory and susceptibility to various diseases [8]. [9]
Key Variants
Section titled “Key Variants”| RS ID | Gene | Related Traits |
|---|---|---|
| rs7614709 rs7625980 rs16860992 | HRG-AS1, HRG | protein measurement protein depp measurement extracellular sulfatase Sulf-2 measurement microfibrillar-associated protein 2 measurement |
| rs1621816 | KNG1, HRG-AS1 | protein depp measurement |
| rs12490146 | HRG-AS1 | histidine-rich glycoprotein measurement protein depp measurement |
| rs73185681 | HRG-AS1 | dual specificity mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 4 measurement protein depp measurement |
| rs17315646 | GALNT2 | dual specificity mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 4 measurement platelet count mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration protein measurement protein depp measurement |
| rs7646890 | HRGP2, HRG-AS1 | protein depp measurement |
| rs186268843 | HRG, HRG-AS1 | protein depp measurement CD27 antigen measurement dual specificity mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 4 measurement |
Definition and Conceptual Framework of Protein Traits
Section titled “Definition and Conceptual Framework of Protein Traits”Protein traits, in the context of genetic association studies, refer to measurable circulating protein levels in biological samples, serving as quantitative phenotypes. These traits are often utilized as biomarkers, providing insights into various physiological or pathological processes. For instance, C-reactive protein (CRP) is widely recognized as an indicator of inflammation and has been described as an “intermediate phenotype” due to its linkage between genetic factors and the development of complex conditions like metabolic syndrome, hypertension, and early diabetogenesis and atherogenesis.[10]Other examples include levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and various interleukins, which are also considered quantitative traits for genetic analysis.[1] The study of these traits helps elucidate the genetic architecture underlying their variability and their subsequent impact on human health.
Measurement Approaches and Operational Criteria
Section titled “Measurement Approaches and Operational Criteria”The measurement of protein traits typically involves quantifying their concentrations in serum or plasma samples, with levels often treated as quantitative traits for statistical analysis. [1] Operational definitions for these traits in research studies include specific handling procedures for values that fall outside assay detection limits; for example, values below detectable limits might be coded as zero. [1] Furthermore, serum measurements are often transformed to achieve normality, such as using log10 transformation for CRP or inverse normal transformation, before applying statistical models like additive genetic models with covariates such as age and sex. [1]For some proteins, like Lipoprotein-A, where normal distribution cannot be achieved, dichotomization based on standard clinical cut-off points may be employed.[1]
Classification Systems and Clinical Significance
Section titled “Classification Systems and Clinical Significance”Protein traits are primarily classified as quantitative traits, meaning their levels vary continuously within a population. However, for clinical or research purposes, these continuous values can be categorized using specific thresholds or cut-off values. For example, Lipoprotein(a) can be dichotomized at a standard clinical cut-off point of 14 mg/dl for high levels.[1]Similarly, National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines define normal ranges for various lipid-related proteins, such as Lp(a) (0.1–6.5 mg/dl), LDL-cholesterol (60–129 mg/dl), HDL-cholesterol (40–80 mg/dl), total cholesterol (120–199 mg/dl), and triglycerides (30–149 mg/dl).[11]These classifications are critical for assessing disease risk, monitoring treatment efficacy, and defining severity gradations, as abnormal protein levels are associated with various metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, including dyslipidemia, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes.[9]
Standardized Terminology and Nomenclature
Section titled “Standardized Terminology and Nomenclature”Key terminology in the study of protein traits includes “protein quantitative trait loci” (pQTLs), which refers to genetic variations that influence the levels of specific proteins. [1] The nomenclature for these proteins often adheres to standardized vocabularies and databases to ensure consistency and facilitate research integration. Proteins are frequently identified using accession numbers from databases such as Swissprot, which provides a comprehensive resource for protein sequences and functional information. [1]For instance, specific proteins like Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG) (P04278), Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) (P01375), C-reactive protein (CRP) (P02741), and Lipoprotein(a) (LPA) (P08519) have unique Swissprot accession numbers, while their corresponding genes are cataloged in databases like Ensembl. [1] This standardized approach allows for precise identification and referencing of the protein traits under investigation.
Proteins in Metabolic and Hepatic Regulation
Section titled “Proteins in Metabolic and Hepatic Regulation”Proteins are fundamental to maintaining cellular functions and orchestrating metabolic processes. This particular protein, like aspartate aminotransferase, often serves as a key indicator of metabolic health, particularly in the context of liver function.[6]Aspartate aminotransferase, an enzyme, participates in amino acid metabolism and gluconeogenesis, pathways critical for energy production and detoxification within the liver. Alterations in its circulating levels can signal hepatocyte damage or metabolic stress, reflecting the liver’s overall physiological state.
Proteins in Immune Signaling and Inflammatory Pathways
Section titled “Proteins in Immune Signaling and Inflammatory Pathways”Many proteins play pivotal roles in the intricate network of immune response and inflammation, acting as signaling molecules or components of regulatory networks. For example, proteins such as CD40 ligand, osteoprotegerin, P-selectin, tumor necrosis factor receptor 2, and tumor necrosis factor-α are known inflammatory markers that mediate various aspects of immune cell activation, adhesion, and cytokine signaling.[6] Their coordinated actions contribute to the body’s defense mechanisms, but dysregulation can lead to chronic inflammation and contribute to the development of various pathophysiological processes, highlighting the diagnostic utility of such protein biomarkers.
Proteins in Cardiovascular and Systemic Homeostasis
Section titled “Proteins in Cardiovascular and Systemic Homeostasis”The maintenance of cardiovascular health and broader systemic homeostasis is significantly influenced by specific proteins acting as hormones or mediators. Natriuretic peptides, for instance, are protein hormones primarily involved in regulating blood pressure and fluid balance, thereby directly impacting cardiovascular function.[6]The presence and concentration of such proteins in the bloodstream offer insights into cardiac load and efficiency, and their dysregulation can lead to conditions like heart failure. Monitoring the levels of these proteins provides critical information about the physiological state of multiple organ systems and their interactions.
Genetic Influences on Protein Biomarker Levels
Section titled “Genetic Influences on Protein Biomarker Levels”The levels and activities of various proteins are under significant genetic control, where variations in the genome can influence gene expression patterns, protein synthesis, and stability. In genome-wide association studies, genetic mechanisms underlying biomarker traits are investigated to understand how an individual’s genetic makeup affects circulating protein levels. These genetic influences can impact not only the basal levels of proteins like those involved in metabolism, inflammation, or cardiovascular regulation but also their response to environmental factors, thus shaping an individual’s risk for various health outcomes.[6]
Pathways and Mechanisms
Section titled “Pathways and Mechanisms”Regulation of Core Metabolic Homeostasis
Section titled “Regulation of Core Metabolic Homeostasis”The maintenance of metabolic balance is governed by a complex interplay of enzymatic activities and regulatory networks, particularly evident in lipid, glucose, and uric acid metabolism. For instance, the cholesterol biosynthesis pathway is tightly regulated, with the enzyme 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) being a key control point influencing its activity, catalysis, and degradation rate, which is also affected by its oligomerization state. [12] Similarly, the FADS gene cluster, encoding fatty acid desaturases, plays a crucial role in the biosynthesis of polyunsaturated fatty acids, catalyzing reactions such as the conversion of eicosatrienoyl-CoA to arachidonyl-CoA and impacting phosphatidylcholine biosynthesis. [13]Beyond lipids, glucose metabolism is influenced by genes likeGCKR(glucokinase regulator), whose polymorphisms are linked to altered insulin secretion and type 2 diabetes risk, by modulating glucokinase activity.[3]
Uric acid homeostasis is largely controlled by the urate transporterSLC2A9 (also known as GLUT9), a renal anion exchanger that regulates serum urate levels and excretion, with variations in this gene influencing gout susceptibility and displaying sex-specific effects.[14]Other metabolic processes, such as the activity of alkaline phosphatase 2, are genetically regulated by specific chromosomal regions[15] while glycosylphosphatidylinositol-specific phospholipase D (GPLD1) has been implicated in conditions like nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, highlighting its role in lipid modification and catabolism.[16] The broader landscape of lipid metabolism further includes factors like angiopoietin-like protein 4 (ANGPTL4), which acts as a potent hyperlipidemia-inducing factor by inhibiting lipoprotein lipase, and apolipoprotein CIII (APOCIII), which contributes to hypertriglyceridemia through its impact on very low-density lipoprotein catabolism.[17]
Transcriptional and Post-Translational Modulators
Section titled “Transcriptional and Post-Translational Modulators”Gene expression and protein function are meticulously controlled through various mechanisms, including alternative splicing and a suite of post-translational modifications. Alternative splicing of pre-mRNA is a significant regulatory layer, as demonstrated by common single nucleotide polymorphisms inHMGCR that affect the alternative splicing of exon 13, influencing LDL-cholesterol levels. [18] This process, crucial for generating protein diversity, is also observed in APOB mRNA, where alternative splicing can lead to novel protein isoforms [19]with its underlying control mechanisms being integral to both normal physiology and human disease.[20]
Beyond gene-level regulation, protein activity and stability are fine-tuned through post-translational modifications. For instance, the association of Pleckstrin with plasma membranes and its ability to induce membrane projections are dependent on its phosphorylation. [21] Protein ubiquitination, mediated by ubiquitin ligases such as Parkin and PJA1, plays a critical role in protein degradation pathways and has direct implications in neurodegenerative conditions like Parkinson’s disease.[22] These intricate layers of genetic and protein-level control ensure precise regulation of cellular processes and contribute to the overall physiological state.
Cellular Signaling and Gene Expression Control
Section titled “Cellular Signaling and Gene Expression Control”Cellular functions are orchestrated by intricate signaling cascades that typically begin with receptor activation and culminate in the regulation of gene expression. Receptors like the leptin receptor (LEPR) and interleukin-6 receptor (IL6R) are integral components of metabolic-syndrome related pathways, influencing plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, thereby linking endocrine signaling to inflammatory responses.[3] Intracellular signaling propagates these external cues, often leading to the activation or repression of specific transcription factors that bind to gene promoters.
Transcription factor regulation is a critical determinant of gene expression. Hepatocyte nuclear factor-1 alpha (HNF1A), for example, is associated with C-reactive protein levels, and its binding at distinct sites on the CRP promoter synergistically trans-activates its expression.[9] Other key transcription factors, including c-Rel, C/EBPbeta, OCT-1, and NF-kappaB, also contribute to the regulation of basal and induced CRP expression by binding to promoter elements. [23]Furthermore, interactions between proteins, such as the low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein (LRP) with the hindbrain development regulator MafB, exemplify how signaling can integrate diverse cellular processes [24]while proteins dependent on the presence or absence of thyroid hormone can interact with the thyroid hormone receptor to modulate gene transcription.[25]
Pathway Crosstalk and Disease Mechanisms
Section titled “Pathway Crosstalk and Disease Mechanisms”Biological systems are characterized by extensive pathway crosstalk and network interactions, where distinct pathways converge or influence one another, leading to emergent properties that underpin complex diseases. Metabolomics studies highlight this interconnectedness, revealing how genetic variants impact the homeostasis of key lipids, carbohydrates, or amino acids, providing a functional readout of physiological states and identifying affected pathways. [2] The observation that metabolic traits can serve as intermediate phenotypes offers a powerful approach to link genetic variance to complex diseases, such as the associations of LIPCpolymorphisms with phospholipids, cholesterol levels, and weakly with type 2 diabetes, bipolar disorder, and rheumatoid arthritis.[2]
Dysregulation within these integrated networks is a hallmark of many diseases. For instance, polymorphisms in the FADSgene cluster are linked to polyunsaturated fatty acid levels in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD)[13] and these genes have also been associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. [26] Loci related to metabolic syndrome pathways, including LEPR, HNF1A, IL6R, and GCKR, are recognized to associate with plasma C-reactive protein, a biomarker of inflammation and CVD risk.[3]Additionally, common variants across multiple loci contribute to polygenic dyslipidemia and influence lipid concentrations, affecting the risk of coronary artery disease.[7]Understanding these complex interconnections is crucial for identifying pathway dysregulation, pinpointing therapeutic targets, and developing strategies for managing diseases such as gout, type 2 diabetes, and specific inflammatory conditions.[27]
References
Section titled “References”[1] Melzer, D et al. “A genome-wide association study identifies protein quantitative trait loci (pQTLs).” PLoS Genet, 2008.
[2] Gieger, C et al. “Genetics meets metabolomics: a genome-wide association study of metabolite profiles in human serum.”PLoS Genet, 2008.
[3] Ridker, P. M. et al. “Loci related to metabolic-syndrome pathways including LEPR,HNF1A, IL6R, and GCKR associate with plasma C-reactive protein: the Women’s Genome Health Study.”Am J Hum Genet, vol. 82, no. 5, 2008, pp. 1185-92.
[4] Yang, Q et al. “Genome-wide association and linkage analyses of hemostatic factors and hematological phenotypes in the Framingham Heart Study.”BMC Med Genet, 2007.
[5] Willer, C. J. et al. “Newly identified loci that influence lipid concentrations and risk of coronary artery disease.”Nat Genet, vol. 40, no. 2, 2008, pp. 161-69.
[6] Benjamin, E. J., et al. “Genome-wide association with select biomarker traits in the Framingham Heart Study.” BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 8, 2007.
[7] Kathiresan, S et al. “Common variants at 30 loci contribute to polygenic dyslipidemia.” Nat Genet, 2008.
[8] Aulchenko, YS et al. “Loci influencing lipid levels and coronary heart disease risk in 16 European population cohorts.”Nat Genet, 2008.
[9] Reiner, A. P. et al. “Polymorphisms of the HNF1A gene encoding hepatocyte nuclear factor-1 alpha are associated with C-reactive protein.”Am J Hum Genet, vol. 82, no. 5, 2008, pp. 1193-201.
[10] Wessel, J., et al. “C-reactive protein, an ‘intermediate phenotype’ for inflammation: human twin studies reveal heritability, association with blood pressure and the metabolic syndrome, and the influence of common polymorphism at catecholaminergic/beta-adrenergic pathway loci.”Journal of Hypertension, vol. 25, no. 2, 2007, pp. 329-43.
[11] Ober, C., et al. “Genome-wide association study of plasma lipoprotein(a) levels identifies multiple genes on chromosome 6q.”Journal of Lipid Research, vol. 50, no. 6, 2009, pp. 1199-1206.
[12] Goldstein, J.L., and Brown, M.S. “Regulation of the mevalonate pathway.” Nature 343 (1990): 425–430.
[13] Malerba, G., et al. “SNPs of the FADS Gene Cluster are Associated with Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in a Cohort of Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.” Lipids 43 (2008): 289–299.
[14] Enomoto, A., Kimura, H., Chairoungdua, A., Shigeta, Y., Jutabha, P., et al. “Molecular identification of a renal urate anion exchanger that regulates blood urate levels.” Nature 417 (2002): 447–452.
[15] Yuan, X., et al. “activity is regulated by a chromosomal region containing the alkaline phosphatase 2 gene (Akp2) in C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice.” Physiol. Genomics 23 (2005): 295–303.
[16] Chalasani, N., Vuppalanchi, R., Raikwar, N.S., and Deeg, M.A. “Glycosylphosphatidylinositol-specific phospholipase d in nonalcoholic Fatty liver disease: A preliminary study.” J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 91 (2006): 2279–2285.
[17] Yoshida, K., Shimizugawa, T., Ono, M., and Furukawa, H. “Angiopoietin-like protein 4 is a potent hyperlipidemia-inducing factor in mice and inhibitor of lipoprotein lipase.” J. Lipid Res. 43 (2002): 1770–1772.
[18] Burkhardt, R et al. “Common SNPs in HMGCR in micronesians and whites associated with LDL-cholesterol levels affect alternative splicing of exon13.” Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, 2008.
[19] Khoo, B., Roca, X., Chew, S.L., and Krainer, A.R. “Antisense oligonucleotide-induced alternative splicing of the APOB mRNA generates a novel isoform of APOB.” BMC Mol Biol 8 (2007): 3.
[20] Matlin, A.J., Clark, F., and Smith, C.W. “Understanding alternative splicing: towards a cellular code.” Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 6 (2005): 386–398.
[21] Ma, A.D., Brass, L.F., and Abrams, C.S. “Pleckstrin associates with plasma membranes and induces the formation of membrane projections: requirements for phosphorylation and the NH2-terminal PH domain.” J Cell Biol 136 (1997): 1071–1079.
[22] Kahle, P.J., and Haass, C. “How does parkin ligate ubiquitin to Parkinson’s disease?” EMBO Rep 5 (2004): 681–685.
[23] Agrawal, A., Samols, D., and Kushner, I. “Transcription factor c-Rel enhances C-reactive protein expression by facilitating the binding of C/EBPbeta to the promoter.” Mol. Immunol. 40 (2003): 373–380.
[24] Petersen, H.H., et al. “Low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein interacts with MafB, a regulator of hindbrain development.” FEBS Lett 565 (2004): 23–27.
[25] Lee, J.W., Choi, H.S., Gyuris, J., Brent, R., and Moore, D.D. “Two classes of proteins dependent on either the presence or absence of thyroid hormone for interaction with the thyroid hormone receptor.” Mol. Endocrinol. 9 (1995): 243–254.
[26] Brookes, K.J., Chen, W., Xu, X., Taylor, E., and Asherson, P. “Association of fatty acid desaturase genes with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.” Biol Psychiatr 60 (2006): 1053–1061.
[27] Vitart, V., et al. “SLC2A9 is a newly identified urate transporter influencing serum urate concentration, urate excretion and gout.” Nat Genet 40 (2008): 18327257.