| Literature DB >> 25884388 |
Shan Chen1, Zongchang Li2, Ying He3, Fengyu Zhang4,5,6, Hong Li7, Yanhui Liao8, Zhen Wei9, Guobin Wan10, Xi Xiang11, Maolin Hu12, Kun Xia13, Xiaogang Chen14,15,16, Jinsong Tang17,18,19.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several lines of evidence indicate mitochondrial impairment in the pathophysiology of autism. As one of the most common biomarkers for mitochondrial dysfunction, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number has also been linked to autism, but the relationship between mtDNA copy number and autism was still obscured. In this study, we performed a case-control study to investigate whether mtDNA copy number in peripheral blood cells is related to patients with autism.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25884388 PMCID: PMC4367837 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-015-0432-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 3.630
Demographic and clinical characteristics of autism patients and healthycontrols
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, months (mean±SD) | 45.4±12.3 | 47.3±12. 5 | 0.413 |
| Sex, n, (%) | 0.175 | ||
| Male | 69 (88.46) | 67 (80.72) | |
| Female | 9 (11.54) | 16 (19.23) | |
| Family training (yes/no)* | 27/35 | ||
| Paternal age, years (mean±SD)* | 30.18±4.64 | ||
| Maternal age, years (mean±SD)* | 27.34±4.68 | ||
| Age of onset, years (mean±SD)* | 2.05±0.71 | ||
| Illness of duration, years (mean±SD)* | 2.49±1.20 | ||
| CARS Score, (mean±SD)* | 34.48±3.01 | ||
| ABC Score, (mean±SD)* | 105.44±9.55 |
*Data from 16 of 78 cases (same subjects) were missing.
Summary statistics of relative mtDNA in autism cases and controls and by sexin autism cases and controls
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||
| Control | 83 | mtDNA | 3.052 | 1.257 | 4.252 | 0.004 | 23.702 | 0.041 | 5.153 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 0.960 | 1.029 | 0.288 | 0.495 | 1.485 | 0.671 | 1.227 | |||
| Autism | 78 | mtDNA | 9.165 | 1.624 | 11.596 | 0.015 | 35.585 | 0.807 | 19.004 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 1.135 | 1.062 | 0.293 | 0.590 | 1.563 | 0.974 | 1.445 | |||
| Male | ||||||||||
| Control | 67 | mtDNA | 3.056 | 0.979 | 4.454 | 0.004 | 23.702 | 0.045 | 4.885 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 0.955 | 0.997 | 0.289 | 0.495 | 1.485 | 0.679 | 1.219 | |||
| Autism | 69 | mtDNA | 8.994 | 1.617 | 11.369 | 0.015 | 35.585 | 0.762 | 18.724 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 1.131 | 1.062 | 0.295 | 0.590 | 1.563 | 0.967 | 1.442 | |||
| Female | ||||||||||
| Control | 16 | mtDNA | 3.037 | 1.585 | 3.399 | 0.014 | 8.473 | 0.036 | 6.681 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 0.979 | 1.057 | 0.291 | 0.589 | 1.306 | 0.660 | 1.267 | |||
| Autism | 9 | mtDNA | 10.478 | 2.570 | 13.908 | 0.038 | 32.939 | 1.030 | 20.978 | |
| sqrtmtDNA | 1.167 | 1.125 | 0.298 | 0.665 | 1.548 | 1.004 | 1.463 |
Note: sqrtmtDNA—Eighth-root transformation of mtDNA.
Linear regression analysis of mtDNA and eighth-root transformed mtDNA and by sex in autism cases and controls
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Overall | ||||||
| Intercept | 12.296 | 3.050 | <.0001 | 1.248 | 0.103 | <.0001 |
| Control vs autism | −6.037 | 1.375 | <.0001 | −0.173 | 0.046 | 0.0003 |
| Female vs Male | −0.317 | 1.904 | 0.8679 | −0.0207 | 0.064 | 0.7469 |
| Age | −0.062 | 0.056 | 0.2636 | −0.0021 | 0.0019 | 0.2715 |
| Male | ||||||
| Intercept | 11.976 | 2.906 | <.0001 | 1.259 | 0.097 | <.0001 |
| Control vs autism | −5.849 | 1.490 | 0.0001 | −0.172 | 0.050 | 0.0008 |
| Age | −0.064 | 0.058 | 0.2735 | −0.0028 | 0.0019 | 0.16 |
| Female | ||||||
| Intercept | 11.763 | 8.332 | 0.172 | 0.9504 | 0.2782 | 0.0025 |
| Control vs autism | −7.284 | 3.803 | 0.0685 | −0.2144 | 0.1270 | 0.1056 |
| Age | −0.032 | 0.193 | 0.8705 | 0.00535 | 0.0064 | 0.4143 |
Figure 1Relative mtDNAcopy number of autistic patients and health controls.
Correlations between mtDNA copy number and clinical variables in childhood autism
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Paternal age | 0.009 | 0.297 |
| Maternal age | 0.002 | 0.778 |
| Age of onset | −0.032 | 0.562 |
| Illness of duration | −0.030 | 0.361 |
| CARS Score | −0.002 | 0.873 |
| ABC Score | −0.001 | 0.844 |
Figure 2MtDNA copy number in autism with and without family training compared with controls. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the mean values was used to analyze the difference of mtDNA copy number among groups (F=6.042, P = 0.003) and the LSD test was used for multiple comparisons between any of the two groups. The differences of mtDNA copy number betweencontrol group and autism subgroup without family training, and autism subgroup withfamily trainingwere statistically significant (P = 0.002, 0.024, respectively). There is no significant difference in mtDNA copy number between patients with and without family training(p=0.592).