Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Genetics and Molecular Biology logoLink to Genetics and Molecular Biology
. 2014 Sep;37(3):473–479. doi: 10.1590/s1415-47572014000400001

Association of T174M polymorphism of angiotensinogen gene with essential hypertension: A meta-analysis

Xiaoyang Liao 1, Zhiyi Yang 1, Daqing Peng 1, Hua Dai 1, Yi Lei 1, Qian Zhao 1, Yanbing Han 1, Weiwen Wang 2,✉
PMCID: PMC4171772  PMID: 25249768

Abstract

The association between T174M polymorphism of angiotensinogen gene and essential hypertension risk remains controversial. We herein performed a meta-analysis to achieve a reliable estimation of their relationship. All the studies published up to May 2013 on the association between T174M polymorphism and essential hypertension risk were identified by searching the electronic repositories PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE, Springer, Elsevier Science Direct, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. Data were extracted and pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. Ultimately, nine eligible studies, including 2188 essential hypertension cases and 2459 controls, were enrolled in this meta-analysis. No significant associations were found under the overall ORs for M-allele comparison (M vs. T, pooled OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62–1.37), MM vs. TT (pooled OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.29–2.51), TM vs. TT n (pooled OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63–1.32), recessive model (MM vs. TT+TM, pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35–2.30), dominant model (MM+TM vs. TT, pooled OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60–1.38) between T174M polymorphism and risk for essential hypertension. This meta-analysis suggested that the T174M polymorphism of the angiotensinogen gene might not be associated with the susceptibility of essential hypertension in Asian or European populations.

Keywords: essential hypertension, case-control study, T174M, polymorphism, meta-analysis

Introduction

Hypertension affects approximately 30% of adults in industrialized countries and is the major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (Nguyen et al., 2013). Hypertension is classified into essential hypertension and secondary hypertension according to the etiology. Secondary hypertension is a type of hypertension caused by an identifiable underlying secondary cause, such as renovascular disease, renal failure, pheochromocytoma, aldosteronism and others, while essential hypertension is defined as hypertension in which secondary causes are not present (Carretero and Oparil, 2000). More than 90% of all hypertensive persons are reported to have essential hypertension (Ghosh et al., 2013). Essential hypertension is associated with large and small vascular remodeling that impacts cardiovascular prognosis (Briet and Schiffrin, 2013). It is generally considered as a paradigmatic multi-factors disease which involves a combination of genetic factors, environmental stimuli and their interaction (O’Shaughnessy, 2001). It has been reported that approximately 20–60% of the inter-individual variation in blood pressure is genetically controlled (Kurtz and Spence, 1993). Thus, we hypothesized that exploring potential hypertension susceptibility genes would help us to better understand the etiology of the disease and, eventually, to better control this disease.

Angiotensinogen (AGT) is a liver protein that interacts with renin to produce angiotensin I, the prohormone of angiotensin II, which is the major effector molecule of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (Gu et al., 2011). It is a promising candidate gene for evaluating susceptibility to essential hypertension (Mohana et al., 2012). T174M polymorphism refers to the substitution of threonine to methionine amino acid at position 174 in exon 2 of the AGT gene. A significant association between T174M polymorphism and the risk of essential hypertension has been reported in several studies (Iso et al., 2000; Jiang et al., 2009). However, several other studies did not detect such an association (Sato et al., 2000; Wang et al., 2002; Nejatizadeh et al., 2008). Therefore, the T174M polymorphism was conflictingly associated with essential hypertension.

In order to achieve an integrative understanding of the association between the T174M polymorphism and the risk of essential hypertension it is necessary to consider the findings as a whole, paying special attention to methodological characteristics of each of the studies. Accordingly, we conducted a systematic review of published findings and used meta-analysis techniques to quantitatively combine the results. This allowed us comprehensively investigate the association between T174M polymorphism and the risk of essential hypertension.

Materials and Methods

Sources for the literature search

A literature search was conducted for studies that reported the effect of T174M polymorphism on the risk of essential hypertension. We systematically searched the PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE, Springer, Elsevier Science Direct, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar electronic databases for articles published up to May 2013. The following key words were used for searching: “T174M”, “hypertension”, “angiotensinogen gene”, “polymorphism”, “variants”, “study” or “trial”. Furthermore, complimentary searches in the references lists of retrieved papers were performed for any additional studies. The research was restricted to full-text English-language articles of studies in humans.

Search methods

Six investigators (XY. L, ZY. Y, DQ. P, H. D, Y. L and Q. Z) independently searched the electronic databases. The abstracts were first reviewed to obtain potentially eligible articles according to the inclusion criteria. To avoid a possible loss of any relevant article, an additional search was performed through the references cited in identified articles.

Included and excluded criteria of studies

Inclusion criteria of studies

Studies were included in the current meta-analysis if they met the following criteria: (1) the investigated patients suffered from essential hypertension (prospective studies, retrospective studies, or cross-sectional studies, etc.); (2) they evaluated the relationship between T174M polymorphism and essential hypertension risk; (3) they had an odds ratio (OR) with an 95% confidence interval (CI), or other available information for estimating the OR (95% CI); (4) they provided available genotype data for the T174M polymorphism.

Exclusion criteria of studies

Studies were excluded if they met the following criteria: (1) they were designed based on family or sibling pairs; (2) the genotype frequency of the T174M polymorphism was not reported; (3) they did not detect an association between T174M polymorphism and susceptibility of essential hypertension; (4) there was insufficient information for extraction of data.

Evaluation of quality and extraction of data

The quality of the included studies was assessed using a ten-point scoring sheet, as previously described (Clark and Baudouin, 2006). The factors including control group, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, case group, primer, reproducibility, blinding, power calculation, statistics, corrected statistics and independent replication were evaluated and the score was recorded as 1 if present or 0 if absent. A final quality score was obtained by summation of each component. Two investigators completed the evaluation independently, and any difference was settled by discussion to reach an agreement between these two investigators.

Two investigators (XY. L and H. Y) independently extracted data according to the inclusion criteria listed above. The extracted data included the first author’s name, year of publication, country, sample size, participants, study design, genotyping methods, source of control group, and distribution of T174M polymorphism within the participants of the case vs. control group in all studies. Some of these data items were obtained from the author of the primary study. Disagreements were resolved by discussion and reaching an agreement among all investigators, or by contacting the original investigators.

Meta-analysis methods

The strength of the association between T174M polymorphisms and essential hypertension risk was determined by an OR with 95% CI. A chi-square test was used to determine whether or not the observed frequencies of genotypes in the controls conformed to HWE (Hardy-Weinberg expectations), and a p-value < 0.05 was considered as significant disequilibrium. Pooled ORs were calculated to examine the contrast of A-allele comparison (M vs. T), MM vs. TT, TM vs. TT, recessive model (MM vs. TT+TM) and dominant model (MM+TM vs. TT), respectively. The significance of pooled ORs was determined by a Z-test and a p-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. We assessed the within- and between-study variation or heterogeneity by Cochran’s Q-statistic testing (Deeks et al., 2001) and calculating the I2 index (I2 = 100%(Q-df)/Q) (Higgins et al., 2003). A significant Q-statistic (p < 0.10) or I2 > 50% indicated heterogeneity across studies, so the pooled OR estimate was calculated using the random-effects (DerSimonian and Laird, 1986). Otherwise, the fixed-effect (Mantel and Haenszel, 1959) was used. Publication bias was evaluated by using the Egger’s linear regression test (Egger et al., 1997), which measures funnel plot asymmetry on the natural logarithm scale of the effect size. Analyses were performed using the STATA software package v.11.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA).

Results

Characteristics of the eligible studies

We retrieved 1037 records that were potentially relevant to the search terms (PubMed: 312; MEDLINE: 136; Springer: 198; Elsevier Science Direct: 105; Cochrane Library: 21; Google Scholar: 265). The study selection process is summarized in Figure 1. After duplicates were removed, this number went down to 129 potentially relevant studies. By screening the abstracts, 89 of these articles were excluded, these including 31 review articles, 23 articles irrelevantto the T174M gene, and 35 articles irrelevantto essential hypertension. The remaining 40 studies were then examined in detail by full text review, this leading to the exclusion of 31 articles, including 17 publications that not about the T174M gene and 14 for not showing available data.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Flowchart of the selection of studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis.

The final result were nine studies (Iso et al., 2000; Sato et al., 2000; Vasku et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2002; Nair et al., 2003; Tsai et al., 2003; Nejatizadeh et al.,2008; Jiang et al., 2009; Yuan et al., 2009). These involved 2188 essential hyper cases and 2459 controls, and by meeting the inclusion criteria they were included in this meta-analysis. All of them were case-control studies. The characteristics of these selected studies are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. The included studies were published between 2000 and 2009. The sample sizes ranged from 203 to 919, and source of control groups were normotensives. Eight studies were conducted in Asian populations and one in a European. Furthermore, the observed genotype counts for T174M polymorphisms in each study were all consistent with Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium (p > 0.05).

Table 1.

Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis.

Study Year Country Ethnicity Genotyping methods Sample size
Source of control Study design
Case Control
Iso et al., 2000 2000 Japan Asian NA 229 690 Normotensives Case-control
Jiang et al., 2009 11 2008 China Asian Multiplex PCR 220 235 Normotensives Case-control
Nair et al., 2003 2003 India Asian PCR-based restriction endonuclease digestion method 134 131 Normotensives Case-control
Nejatizadeh et al., 2008 2008 India Asian NA 450 358 Normotensives Case-control
Sato et al., 2000 2000 Japan Asian PCR-RFLP 180 195 Normotensives Case-control
Tsai et al., 2003 2003 China Asian Mini-PCR 408 286 Normotensives Case-control
Vasku et al., 2002 2002 Czech Republic European NA 189 201 Normotensives Case-control
Wang et al., 2002 2002 China Asian PCR amplifications 107 96 Normotensives Case-control
Yuan et al., 2009 2009 China Asian PCR-RFLP 271 267 Normotensives Case-control
Open in a new tab

Table 2.

Genotype frequencies of T174M polymorphism in studies included in the meta-analysis.

Study Year of publication Case genotype Control genotype HWEa
TT TM MM TT TM MM Chi-square test p value
Iso et al., 2000 2000 177 50 2 335 289 66 0.10 0.74
Jiang et al., 2009 2009 126 85 9 167 63 5 0.11 0.73
Nair et al., 2003 2003 104 29 1 102 27 2 0.01 0.88
Nejatizadeh et al., 2008 2008 378 67 5 291 61 6 1.73 0.19
Sato et al., 2000 2000 145 31 4 155 38 2 0.04 0.84
Tsai et al., 2003 2003 326 70 12 231 53 2 0.31 0.58
Vasku et al., 2002 2002 142 44 3 147 50 4 0.01 0.92
Wang et al., 2002 2002 91 15 1 79 16 1 0.04 0.85
Yuan et al., 2009 2009 227 44 0 235 32 0 1.08 0.29
Open in a new tab
a

HWE: Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, evaluated using the goodness-of-fit chi-square test. p < 0.05 was considered representative of a departure from HWE.

Meta-analysis of the association between T174M polymorphism and risk for essential hypertension

Crude ORs with 95% CIs were used to assess the association between T174M polymorphism and risk of essential hypertension. Significant heterogeneities were observed across the studies for M-allele comparison (M vs. T, p < 0.01 and I2 = 88.2%), MM vs. TT comparison (p < 0.01 and I2 = 73.0%), TM vs. TT comparison (p < 0.01 and I2 = 82.9%), recessive model (MM vs. TT+TM, p < 0.01 and I2 = 65.4%) and dominant model (MM+TM vs. TT, p < 0.01 and I2 = 87.1%) (Table 3). Therefore, the random effect model was applied to estimate the overall ORs.

Table 3.

Meta-analysis of the association between T174M polymorphism and risk of essential hypertension using random effect model.

Groups No. of studies M vs. T MM vs. TT TM vs. TT MM vs. TT+TM MM+TM vs. TT
OR(95%CI) PA I2 (%) PH OR(95%CI) PA I2 (%) PH OR(95%CI) PA I2 (%) PH OR(95%CI) PA I2 (%) PH OR(95%CI) PA I2 (%) PH
Overall 9 0.92 (0.62, 1.37) 0.69 88.2 < 0.01 0.86 (0.29, 2.51) 0.78 73.0 < 0.01 0.91 (0.63, 1.32) 0.62 82.9 < 0.01 0.89 (0.35, 2.30) 0.81 65.4 < 0.01 0.91 (0.60, 1.38) 0.65 87.1 < 0.01
Ethnicity
Asian 8 0.93 (0.59, 1.44) 0.73 89.6 < 0.01 0.87 (0.25, 3.04) 0.83 77.0 < 0.01 0.91 (0.60, 1.38) 0.66 85.0 < 0.01 0.91 (0.30, 2.74) 0.86 70.5 < 0.01 0.91 (0.57, 1.46) 0.7 88.7 < 0.01
European 1 0.90 (0.60, 1.36) 0.63 - - 0.78 (0.17, 3.53) 0.74 - - 0.91 (0.57, 1.45) 0.70 - - 0.79 (0.18, 3.60) 0.77 - - 0.90 (0.57, 1.42) 0.65 - -
Sample size
< 500 5 1.09 (0.82, 1.45) 0.53 47.0 0.11 1.46 (0.70, 3.02) 0.31 0.0 0.64 1.09 (0.79, 1.51) 0.60 47.2 0.11 1.36 (0.66, 2.81) 0.41 0.0 0.74 1.10 (0.79, 1.53) 0.58 51.5 0.08
≥500 4 0.79 (0.39, 1.60) 0.52 93.5 < 0.01 0.53 (0.05, 5.76) 0.61 88.9 < 0.01 0.77 (0.41, 1.43) 0.41 89.7 < 0.01 0.61 (0.07, 5.27) 0.65 86.6 < 0.01 0.76 (0.37, 1.56) 0.45 92.7 < 0.01
Open in a new tab

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; pH, p value for between-study heterogeneity; PA, p value for test of the association.

In the present study, no significant difference was observed in the risk of essential hypertension between the genotypes M vs. T (pooled OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62–1.37), MM vs. TT (pooled OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.29–2.51), TM vs. TT (pooled OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63–1.32), MM vs. TT+TM (pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35–2.30), or MM+TM vs. TT (pooled OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60–1.38) (Table 3).

We also performed a subgroup analysis stratified by geographic location (ethnicity) and sample size. As shown in Table 3, this refined further analysis still did not indicated an association between T174M polymorphism and essential hypertension risk.

Publication bias

The Egger’s test was performed to assess the publication bias of the published studies. For all comparisons, the p value of the Egger’s test was higher than 0.05 (Table 4), this indicating that there was no evident publication bias in this meta-analysis.

Table 4.

Tests for publication bias (Egger’s test) in population (overall).

Comparison Egger’s test
t p value
M vs. T 0.76 0.47
MM vs. TT −0.20 0.85
TM vs. TT 0.84 0.43
MM vs. TT+TM −0.16 0.88
MM+TM vs. TT 0.84 0.43
Open in a new tab

Discussion

The association between the T174M polymorphism and risk for essential hypertension was not clear due to inconsistent data generated by a range of independent studies (Nair et al., 2003; Tsai et al., 2003; Jiang et al., 2009; Nejatizadeh et al., 2008). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of published studies to clarify the inconsistency and to establish a comprehensive picture of this gene-disease association. All studies included in this analysis were conducted in Asian or European populations with high prevalence of essential hypertension. In our meta-analysis, a total of nine studies were included, these comprising 2188 cases and 2459 controls. The conclusion is that no significant association was detected between the T174M polymorphism and essential hypertension risk.

The findings of the present study were different from the results of a previous meta-analysis conducted by Pereira et al. (2008), in which a codominant model of T174M polymorphism demonstrated a significant increase in the risk of essential hypertension in Asians (10 studies were included and four of them were Chinese) and in mixed/other populations (including African, Indo-European/East Asian, Russian Arab and Turkish) but not in a population of European descendants. Upon comparing these two meta-analyses, we found that two studies (Morise et al., 1995; Yi-Yang et al., 2006) conducted among Asian populations (one in Japan and one in Chain) were included in the analysis of Pereira et al. (2008) but not in ours. These two studies indicated a significantly increased risk of essential hypertension among populations carrying the 174M allele. This may be one reason for the different outcomes of these two meta-analyses. Furthermore, it should be noted that in the study of Pereira et al. (2008) a potential publication bias was present.

The AGT gene T174M polymorphism was first reported by Jeunemaitre et al. (1992) to be related to the prevalence of essential hypertension. Since then several studies on this relationship, enrolling various ethnic groups, have been published. Some studies confirmed the association between T174M variant and hypertension(Gardemann et al., 1999; Procopciuc et al., 2005), but others did not (Nair et al., 2003; Renner et al., 2005). Moreover, some studies reached different conclusions, even when they were performed among the same ethnic populations (Qi et al., 2007; Gu et al., 2011). There are several potential explanations for the discrepancies among these studies. The first possible cause may be genetic differences in the population samples and phenotypic differences in the hypertensive populations analyzed (Marco et al., 2005). Second, the effect of the T174M variant on plasma AGT levels may vary among different ethnic groups so that the association between T174M polymorphism and risk of essential hypertension may not be detected in every ethnic group, just as shown in the study of Pereira et al. (2008). Most studies included in current meta-analysis were conducted in Asian populations and only one in a European population, this meaning that the final result may not be generalizable. Therefore, more studies need to be performed in various ethnic groups and subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity should be conducted in future research. Second, the reliability of the findings of a study may be questionable if it lacks an appropriate control group. In some studies, the age and percentage of subjects with alcohol consumption or smoking were significantly different between the hypertensive and control groups (Hingorani et al., 1996; Kiema et al., 1996). A third possible cause of discrepancy may be a multiple interaction of polymorphisms or genes. These gene-to-gene interactions make the association of hypertension with any single candidate gene more complex (Wang et al., 2002). In addition, the numbers of cases were different in various studies, this leading to variation in precision. Finally, hypertension is an acknowledged multi-factorial disease. Genetic factors may interact with several other factors, such as salt intake, body mass index, and smoking in the development of hypertension.

Certain limitations of this study need to be mentioned. First of all, heterogeneity across the studies was observed. One possible reason for the presence of heterogeneity is the wide variation in populations included (77.7% in Asian and 11.1% in European). Second, the effect of genetic and environmental interactions was not considered. In addition, all the included articles were case-control studies and the number of studies was small (nine). Therefore, more and high-quality case-control studies are still needed to test and verify the results of this metaanalysis. Finally, our analysis was limited to eight studies on Asian and one on European populations, which is certainly not representative of all ethnicities. The association between the T174M polymorphism and risk of essential hypertension still needs to be clarified.

Despite these limitations, this meta-analysis suggests that the T174M polymorphism of the angiotensinogen gene is not associated with susceptibility of essential hypertension, and the allele M may not increase the risk of essential hypertension in Asian or European populations. Considering the different genetic and phenotypic features among different ethnic groups, larger and well-designed studies based on different populations are needed to confirm our results.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all respondents of the study and all the people who helped in this study.

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Patrícia Ashton-Prolla

References

  1. Briet M, Schiffrin EL. Treatment of arterial remodeling in essential hypertension. Curr Hypertension Rep. 2013;15:3–9. doi: 10.1007/s11906-012-0325-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carretero OA, Oparil S. Essential hypertension part I: definition and etiology. Circulation. 2000;101:329–335. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.3.329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Clark MF, Baudouin SV. A systematic review of the quality of genetic association studies in human sepsis. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:1706–1712. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0327-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger M, Altmann DG, Bradburn MJ, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd edition. BMJ Publ Group; London: 2001. pp. 285–312. [Google Scholar]
  5. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gardemann A, Stricker J, Humme J, Nguyen QD, Katz N, Philipp M, Tillmanns H, Hehrlein FW, Haberbosch W. Angiotensinogen T174M and M235T gene polymorphisms are associated with the extent of coronary atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis. 1999;145:309–314. doi: 10.1016/s0021-9150(99)00082-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ghosh R, Bhattacharya M, Khan G, Chakraborty S, Bhattacharya R, Maji UK, Jana P, Sinha AK. Diagnosis of essential hypertension in humans by the determination of plasma renal cortexin using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Clin Lab. 2013;59:475–481. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Gu W, Liu Y, Wang Z, Liu K, Lou Y, Niu Q, Wang H, Liu J, Wen S. Association between the angiotensinogen gene T174M polymorphism and hypertension risk in the Chinese population: a meta-analysis. Hypertens Res. 2011;35:70–76. doi: 10.1038/hr.2011.141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hingorani AD, Sharma P, Jia H, Hopper R, Brown MJ. Blood pressure and the M235T polymorphism of the angiotensinogen gene. Hypertension. 1996;28:907–911. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.28.5.907. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Iso H, Harada S, Shimamoto T, Sato S, Kitamura A, Sankai T, Tanigawa T, Iida M, Komachi Y. Angiotensinogen T174M and M235T variants, sodium intake and hypertension among non-drinking, lean Japanese men and women. J Hypertens. 2000;18:1197–1206. doi: 10.1097/00004872-200018090-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jeunemaitre X, Soubrier F, Kotelevtsev YV, Lifton RP, Williams CS, Charru A, Hunt SC, Hopkins PN, Williams RR, Lalouel J-M. Molecular basis of human hypertension: role of angiotensinogen. Cell. 1992;71:169–180. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90275-h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Jiang X, Sheng H, Li J, Xun P, Cheng Y, Huang J, Xiao H, Zhan Y. J Association between renin–angiotensin system gene polymorphism and essential hypertension: a community-based study. J Hum Hypertens. 2009;23:176–181. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2008.123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kiema T-R, Kauma H, Rantala AO, Lilja M, Reunanen A, Kesäniemi YA, Savolainen MJ. Variation at the angiotensin-converting enzyme gene and angiotensinogen gene loci in relation to blood pressure. Hypertension. 1996;28:1070–1075. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.28.6.1070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kurtz TW, Spence MA. Genetics of essential hypertension. Am J Med. 1993;94:77–84. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(93)90124-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22(4):719–748. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Marco J, Zabay J, García-Marco M, Gomez G, Mulet J, Munar M, Soler J, Viader C. Angiotensinogen gene T174M polymorphism: opposite relationships with essential hypertension and obesity in a homogeneous population from Majorca (Balearic Islands, Spain) Nefrología. 2005;25:629. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Mohana VU, Swapna N, Surender RS, Vishnupriya S, Padma T. Gender-related association of AGT gene variants (M235T and T174M) with essential hypertension - A case-control study. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2012;34:38–44. doi: 10.3109/10641963.2011.618207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Morise T, Takeuchi Y, Takeda R. Rapid detection and prevalence of the variants of the angiotensinogen gene in patients with essential hypertension. J Intern Med. 1995;237:175–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.1995.tb01158.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nair K, Shalia K, Ashavaid T, Dalal J. Coronary heart disease, hypertension, and angiotensinogen gene variants in indian opulation. J Clin Lab Anal. 2003;17:141–146. doi: 10.1002/jcla.10084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nejatizadeh A, Kumar R, Stobdan T, Goyal AK, Gupta M, Javed S, Pasha MQ. Significance of angiotensinogen gene haplotypes and genotypes combinations in hypertension. J Hypertens. 2008;26:1094–1101. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282fad951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Nguyen K-DH, Pihur V, Ganesh SK, Rakha A, Cooper RS, Hunt SC, Freedman BI, Coresh J, Kao WL, Morrison AC. Effects of rare and common blood pressure gene variants on essential hypertension results from the Family Blood Pressure Program, CLUE, and Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Studies. Circ Res. 2013;112:318–326. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.112.276725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. O’Shaughnessy KM. The genetics of essential hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;51:5–11. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2001.01254.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Pereira TV, Nunes AC, Rudnicki M, Yamada Y, Pereira AC, Krieger JE. Meta-analysis of the association of 4 angiotensinogen polymorphisms with essential hypertension a role beyond M235T? Hypertension. 2008;51:778–783. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.100370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Procopciuc L, Pop D, Zdrenghea D, Jebeleanu G. Genetic analysis of angiotensinogen gene polymorphisms (M235T and T174M) in Romanian patients with essential arterial hypertension. Roman J Intern Med. 2005;43:61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Qi Y, Niu W, Zhou W, Hou S, Qiu C. Correlation between angiotensinogen gene polymorphisms and essential hypertension in Chinese population. J Hum Hypertens. 2007;22:147–150. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1002282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Renner W, Nauck M, Winkelmann BR, Hoffmann MM, Scharnagl H, Mayer V, Boehm BO, März W. Association of angiotensinogen haplotypes with angiotensinogen levels but not with blood pressure or coronary artery disease: the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health Study. J Mol Med. 2005;83:235–239. doi: 10.1007/s00109-004-0618-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Sato N, Katsuya T, Nakagawa T, Ishikawa K, Fu Y, Asai T, Fukuda M, Suzuki F, Nakamura Y, Higaki J. Nine polymorphisms of angiotensinogen gene in the susceptibility to essential hypertension. Life Sci. 2000;68:259–272. doi: 10.1016/s0024-3205(00)00795-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Tsai C-T, Fallin D, Chiang F-T, Hwang J-J, Lai L-P, Hsu K-L, Tseng C-D, Liau C-S, Tseng Y-Z. Angiotensinogen gene haplotype and hypertension interaction with ACE gene I allele. Hypertension. 2003;41:9–15. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.0000045080.28739.12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Vasku ASM, Tschöplová S, Stejskalová A. An association of BMI with A (−6) G, M235T and T174M polymorphisms in angiotensinogen gene in essential hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. 2002;16:427–430. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang J-H, Lin C-M, Wang L-S, Lai N-S, Chen D-Y, Cherng J-M. Association between molecular variants of the angiotensinogen gene and hypertension in Amis tribes of eastern Taiwan. J Formosan Med Assoc. 2002;101:183–188. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Yi-Yang Z XJ, Hai-hui S, Gang L, Yun-lin C, Jun H. Association between partial indexes of angiotensinogen gene polymorphisms and the risk of essential hypertension: a community case-control study. Chin J Clin Rehabil. 2006;10:5. [Google Scholar]
  34. Yuan J, Tang W, Chun Y, Ying H, Yang Y, Xiao C. Angiotensinogen T174M and M235T variants and hypertension in the Hani and Yi minority groups of China. Biochem Genet. 2009;47:344–350. doi: 10.1007/s10528-009-9237-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics and Molecular Biology are provided here courtesy of Sociedade Brasileira de Genética

RESOURCES