↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Analysis of the association between the LUM rs3759223 variant and high myopia in a Japanese population

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Analysis of the association between the LUM rs3759223 variant and high myopia in a Japanese population
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s104761
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shintaro Okui, Akira Meguro, Masaki Takeuchi, Takahiro Yamane, Eiichi Okada, Yasuhito Iijima, Nobuhisa Mizuki

Abstract

Many studies have investigated the relationship of the lumican gene (LUM) rs3759223 variant with the risk of high myopia, but the results have been inconsistent and inconclusive. In this study, we investigated whether LUM rs3759223 is associated with high myopia in a Japanese population. We recruited 1,585 Japanese patients with high myopia (spherical equivalent [SE] <-9.00 diopters [D]) and 1,011 Japanese healthy controls (SE ≥-1.00 D). The rs3759223 variant was genotyped using the TaqMan assay, and the allelic and genotypic diversity among cases and controls was analyzed according to the SE level. In the allelic tests, the odds ratio (OR) for the T allele of rs3759223 tended to increase with the progression of SE, and the highest OR (1.56) was found in patients with SE <-15 D in both eyes. The OR of the T allele tended to increase with the progression of SE in the additive, dominant, and recessive inheritance models. However, we found no significant associations for any of the alleles or genotype models. These data support the possibility that the LUM rs3759223 T allele accelerates the progression of SE in the Japanese population, although no significant associations were observed in this study. Additional genetic studies with larger samples that take into account the degree of SE are needed to clarify the contribution of rs3759223 to the risk of high myopia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 29%
Unspecified 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,465
of 332,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#48
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.