OphSourceHomeJournal CollectionOphSource ShopEvents
Journal Home
Search for

Volume 116, Issue 8, Pages 1469-1474.e1 (August 2009)


View previous. 12 of 40 View next.

cMET and Refractive Error Progression in Children

Chiea C. Khor, MBBS, DPhil12Corresponding Author Informationemail address, Robert Grignani, MBBS, DPhil1, Daniel P.K. Ng, PhD3, Kai Yee Toh, BSc1, Kee-Seng Chia, MPH, PhD37, Donald Tan, FRCOpth45, Denise L.M. Goh, MD, MRCPCH167, Seang-Mei Saw, MPH, PhD345

Received 20 November 2008; received in revised form 25 February 2009; accepted 26 February 2009. published online 04 June 2009.

Objective

To assess whether genetic variation in cMET is associated with refractive error or change in refractive error over time.

Design

Cohort study.

Participants and Controls

Discovery set (Set 1: N = 579 children; 403 cases, 176 controls). Confirmatory set (Set 2: N = 547 children; 338 cases, 209 controls).

Methods

Children in the discovery set were genotyped for a panel of genetic markers within cMET. Markers that were found to be significantly associated with the presence of refractive error or more rapid change in refractive error were then genotyped in the confirmatory set.

Main Outcome Measures

Presence or absence of myopia and the rate of change in refractive error over a 3-year follow-up period.

Results

Carriage of the variant cMET +110703 A allele was found to associate with increased susceptibility to myopia. The variant was also found to associate with a faster rate of change in refractive error in both the discovery set and the confirmatory cohort regardless of the initial refractory ability (School 1; χ2 for trend P = 0.014) (Schools 2 and 3; χ2 for trend = 5.42, P = 0.020) (combined N = 1126, overall χ2 for trend = 10.90, P = 9.6×10−4). Carriage of the variant allele was also found to be significantly overrepresented in children within the fastest changing quartile (Q4: mean change of −3.01 D over 3 years) compared with the slowest (Q1: mean change of −0.28 D over 3 years) (PSet1 = 0.004, PSet2 = 0.02, Combined N = 559, P = 3.0×10−4).

Conclusions

Our data implicate the involvement of cMET in the pathogenesis of myopia in general, as well as more rapid progression in refractive error regardless of the initial refractory ability. These results underline the importance of eye growth genes in the development of common myopia.

Financial Disclosure(s)

The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Available online: June 4, 2009.

1 Genetic Medicine Group, Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, Singapore

2 Immunity and Inflammation Group, the Wellcome Trust Center for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

3 Department of Community, Occupational and Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

4 Department of Ophthalmology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

5 Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore

6 Department of Paediatrics, National University Hospital, and School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

7 NUS-GIS Centre for Molecular Epidemiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore

Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence: Chiea C. Khor, MBBS, DPhil, Brenner Centre for Molecular Medicine, 30 Medical Drive, Singapore 117609

 Manuscript no. 2008-1378.

 Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

 Funding for this study was provided by the National Medical Research Council (NMRC/0975/2005), Biomedical Research Council (BMRC 06/1/21/19/466) of the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A-STAR), and the Centre for Molecular Epidemiology, National University of Singapore. CCK and RTG are scholars of A-STAR.

PII: S0161-6420(09)00224-3

doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.02.026


View previous. 12 of 40 View next.