BACKGROUND: We examined the association between 799 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in 39 sex hormone genes and blood pressure (BP) responses to a dietary-sodium intervention. METHODS: A 7-day low-sodium feeding study (51.3 mmol sodium/day) followed by a 7-day high-sodium feeding study (307.8 mmol sodium/day) was conducted among 1,906 Han Chinese participants. Nine BP measurements were obtained at baseline and the end of each intervention period using a random-zero sphygmomanometer. RESULTS: Among men, absolute BP responses to sodium interventions decreased with the number of minor alleles of estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) markers rs9340844, rs9397453, rs9371562, rs9397459, and rs9383951. For example, mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) responses to low-sodium intervention (95% confidence interval) were -2.67 (-3.13, -2.22) mm Hg among those with the rs9397453 C/C genotype, -1.23 (-1.98, -0.48) mm Hg among those with the C/T genotype, and 0.08 (-2.31, 2.47) mm Hg among those with the T/T genotype (P = 1×10(-4); false discovery rate (FDR)-q = 0.04). Mean DBP responses to high sodium according to the rs9397453 genotypes were 1.46 (1.03, 1.89) mm Hg among those with C/C, 0.19 (-0.54, 0.91) mm Hg among those with C/T, and -1.10 (-2.82, 0.61) mm Hg among those with T/T (P = 2×10(-4); FDR-q = 0.04). Similar trends were noted for the association between these ESR1 variants and SBP responses to the dietary intervention. There were no significant associations between sex hormone gene variants and salt sensitivity in women, with genotype-gender interactions noted for the ESR1 markers that achieved significance in men. CONCLUSIONS: We identified strong, consistent associations between ESR1 gene variants and salt sensitivity in men. Our results support a gender-specific role for ESR1 in the etiology of this complex trait.
BACKGROUND: We examined the association between 799 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in 39 sex hormone genes and blood pressure (BP) responses to a dietary-sodium intervention. METHODS: A 7-day low-sodium feeding study (51.3 mmol sodium/day) followed by a 7-day high-sodium feeding study (307.8 mmol sodium/day) was conducted among 1,906 Han Chinese participants. Nine BP measurements were obtained at baseline and the end of each intervention period using a random-zero sphygmomanometer. RESULTS: Among men, absolute BP responses to sodium interventions decreased with the number of minor alleles of estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) markers rs9340844, rs9397453, rs9371562, rs9397459, and rs9383951. For example, mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) responses to low-sodium intervention (95% confidence interval) were -2.67 (-3.13, -2.22) mm Hg among those with the rs9397453 C/C genotype, -1.23 (-1.98, -0.48) mm Hg among those with the C/T genotype, and 0.08 (-2.31, 2.47) mm Hg among those with the T/T genotype (P = 1×10(-4); false discovery rate (FDR)-q = 0.04). Mean DBP responses to high sodium according to the rs9397453 genotypes were 1.46 (1.03, 1.89) mm Hg among those with C/C, 0.19 (-0.54, 0.91) mm Hg among those with C/T, and -1.10 (-2.82, 0.61) mm Hg among those with T/T (P = 2×10(-4); FDR-q = 0.04). Similar trends were noted for the association between these ESR1 variants and SBP responses to the dietary intervention. There were no significant associations between sex hormone gene variants and salt sensitivity in women, with genotype-gender interactions noted for the ESR1 markers that achieved significance in men. CONCLUSIONS: We identified strong, consistent associations between ESR1 gene variants and salt sensitivity in men. Our results support a gender-specific role for ESR1 in the etiology of this complex trait.
Authors: Paul K Whelton; Jiang He; Lawrence J Appel; Jeffrey A Cutler; Stephen Havas; Theodore A Kotchen; Edward J Roccella; Ron Stout; Carlos Vallbona; Mary C Winston; Joanne Karimbakas Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-10-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Antoinette Pechère-Bertschi; Marc Maillard; Hans Stalder; Hans R Brunner; Michel Burnier Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Gary Pare; Andrée Krust; Richard H Karas; Sonia Dupont; Mark Aronovitz; Pierre Chambon; Michael E Mendelsohn Journal: Circ Res Date: 2002-05-31 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: F M Sacks; L P Svetkey; W M Vollmer; L J Appel; G A Bray; D Harsha; E Obarzanek; P R Conlin; E R Miller; D G Simons-Morton; N Karanja; P H Lin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-01-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eva Obarzanek; Michael A Proschan; William M Vollmer; Thomas J Moore; Frank M Sacks; Lawrence J Appel; Laura P Svetkey; Marlene M Most-Windhauser; Jeffrey A Cutler Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-09-02 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Worapaka Manosroi; Jia Wei Tan; Chevon M Rariy; Bei Sun; Mark O Goodarzi; Aditi R Saxena; Jonathan S Williams; Luminita H Pojoga; Jessica Lasky-Su; Jinrui Cui; Xiuqing Guo; Kent D Taylor; Yii-Der I Chen; Anny H Xiang; Willa A Hsueh; Leslie J Raffel; Thomas A Buchanan; Jerome I Rotter; Gordon H Williams; Ellen W Seely Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Shad B Smith; Ilkka Reenilä; Pekka T Männistö; Gary D Slade; William Maixner; Luda Diatchenko; Andrea G Nackley Journal: Pain Date: 2014-09-16 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Lisa de Las Fuentes; Yun Ju Sung; Karen L Schwander; Sonia Kalathiveetil; Steven C Hunt; Donna K Arnett; D C Rao Journal: Front Genet Date: 2013-12-25 Impact factor: 4.599