Close
Help
Need Help?





JOURNAL

Genomics Insights

31,932 Journal Article Views | Journal Analytics

Sickle Cell Disease in the Post Genomic Era: A Monogenic Disease with a Polygenic Phenotype

Submit a Paper



Publication Date: 30 Jul 2009

Type: Review

Journal: Genomics Insights

Citation: Genomics Insights 2009:2 23-48

Abstract

More than half a century after the discovery of the molecular basis of Sickle Cell Disease (SCD), the causes of the phenotypic heterogeneity of the disease remain unclear. This heterogeneity manifests with different clinical outcomes such as stroke, vaso-occlusive episodes, acute chest syndrome, avascular necrosis, leg ulcers, priapism and retinopathy. These outcomes cannot be explained by the single mutation in the beta-globin gene alone but may be attributed to genetic modifiers and environmental effects. Recent advances in the post human genome sequence era have opened the door for the identification of novel genetic modifiers in SCD. Studies are showing that phenotypes of SCD seem to be modulated by polymorphisms in genes that are involved in inflammation, cell–cell interaction and modulators of oxidant injury and nitric oxide biology. The discovery of genes implicated in different phenotypes will help understanding of the physiopathology of the disease and aid in establishing targeted cures. However, caution is needed in asserting that genetic modifiers are the cause of all SCD phenotypes, because there are other factors such as genetic background of the population, environmental components, socio-economics and psychology that can play significant roles in the clinical heterogeneity.


Downloads

PDF  (4.25 MB PDF FORMAT)

RIS citation   (ENDNOTE, REFERENCE MANAGER, PROCITE, REFWORKS)

BibTex citation   (BIBDESK, LATEX)


Sharing




What Your Colleagues Say About Genomics Insights
Recently we published a paper describing cloning of a new kinase gene, MLK4, in Genomics Insights. I was impressed by the prompt processing and  speed of publication.  The comments from the reviewers allowed me to improve the paper significantly.  The reviews were scientifically deep and objective, which is very valuable because in many journals decisions to publish or not to publish are very unfair and subjective. I highly recommend that other ...
Dr Eugene R. Zabarovsky (Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden)
More Testimonials

Quick Links


New article and journal news notification services
Email Alerts RSS Feeds
Facebook Google+ Twitter
Pinterest Tumblr YouTube