Back to all available

Potential impact of METTL14 gene polymorphisms on knee osteoarthritis susceptibility

genomics
orthopedics
medical-genetics

Abstract

Background: To explore the potential involvement of methyltransferase-like 14 (METTL14) gene SNPs in the risk of knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Methods: Polymorphism selection and genotyping of METTL14 gene SNPs with potential functions were performed using the dbSNP database and SNPinfo software. A total of 228 cases and 252 controls were recruited. METTL14 genotypes were detected by Taqman real-time polymerase chain reaction assay. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the relationship between the six selected SNPs and the susceptibility to KOA. The MDR software, v3.0.2, was employed for SNP and SNP interaction analysis. Meanwhile, we examined the impact of METTL14 rs1064034 T>A, rs167246 G>C, and rs298982 G>A on the expression of target genes in Cis-expression quantitative trait loci using data from GTEx.

Results: This study discovered that the rs1064034 T>A and rs167246 G>C variants were significantly associated with an increased susceptibility to KOA; in contrast, the rs298982 G>A polymorphism was associated with a decreased risk of KOA. Stratification analyses further confirmed the harmful effect of rs1064034 T>A and rs167246 G>C on relevant medical history, and the protective effect of rs298982 G>A on sex and the clinical features. Compared with the reference haplotype TGG, the haplotypes ACG, TCA, and TCG increased the risk of KOA.

Conclusion: Our results indicated a significant association between the polymorphisms rs1064034 T>A, rs167246 G>C, and rs298982 G>A of the METTL14 gene and KOA.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].