Open Access

RETRACTED ARTICLE: A novel polymorphism of the GP78 gene is associated with coronary artery disease in Han population in China

Lipids in Health and Disease201413:1

https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-511X-13-147

Received: 17 July 2014

Accepted: 26 August 2014

Published: 9 September 2014

Editor's Note

This article has been retracted. The retraction notice can be found here: http://lipidworld.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12944-015-0063-9

The Retraction Note to this article has been published in Lipids in Health and Disease 2015 14:78

Abstract

Background

GP78 is a membrane-anchored ubiquitin ligase mediating the degradation of 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) and Insig-1, which was very essential for the synthesis of cholesterol process. Cholesterol levels have a causal role in the development of cardiovascular disease. The aim of the present study was to assess the association between the human gp78 gene polymorphism and coronary artery disease (CAD) in a Han and Uygur population of China.

Methods

We used two independent case–control studies: a Han population (602 CAD patients and 572control subjects) and a Uygur population (374 CAD patients and 376control subjects). All CAD patients and controls were genotyped for the same three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (rs731119, rs2617849and rs2440472) of gp78 gene by a Real-time PCR instrument.

Results

In the Han population, for total and men, the distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) alleles and the dominant model (AA vs AG + GG) and recessive model (GG vs AG + AA) showed a significant difference between CAD and control participants (for allele: P = 0.003 and P = 0.002, respectively; for dominant model: P = 0.041 and P = 0.026, respectively; for recessive model: p = 0.004 and p = 0.004, respectively).The significant difference in both the two models was retained after adjustment for covariates (for dominant model OR:0.760, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.584-0.99, P = 0.042; OR:0.686, 95% CI: 0.498-0.946, P = 0.022, respectively; for recessive model OR: 1.451, 95% CI: 1.067-1.974, P = 0.018; OR: 1.789, 95% CI: 1.219-2.627, P = 0.000). Our data was also assessed via haplotype-based case–control studies. For the Han population, for total, The G-T-G haplotype in CAD was significantly higher than that in the control group (P = 0.02), and the G-C-A haplotype in CAD was significantly lower than that in the control group (P = 0.0443), And for man, the G-T-G haplotype in CAD was significantly higher than that in the control group (P = 0.0048).

Conclusions

The GG genotype and G allele of rs2440472 in gp78 gene could be a risk genetic marker of CAD in Han population in China.

Keywords

gp78 Single nucleotide polymorphism Coronary artery disease Case–control study Haplotype

Introduction

The etiology and pathogenesis of coronary artery disease (CAD) are likely to comprise a multifactorial disorder resulting from inheritance of several susceptibility genes, as well as multiple environmental determinants [1, 2]. Experimental, genetic, and epidemiologic data support the concept that an elevated plasma level of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is a primary causal factor in the pathogenesis of coronary artery disease [3], a main underlying pathology is atherosclerosis, a process of cumulative deposition of LDL cholesterol in the arteries supplying blood to the heart and brain that eventually leads to impaired or absent blood supply and myocardial infarction or stroke [4]. Consistent and compelling evidence has demonstrated association between lipid concentrations and cardiovascular disease incidence worldwide [57]. HMGCR catalyzes the conversion of 3-hydroxy-3-methy-lglutaryl coenzyme A ( HMG-CoA ) to mevalonate that is a rate limiting step in cholesterol biosynthesis [8]. Sterol promotes the degradation of HMGCR through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, and therefore slows down cholesterol biosynthesis [9]. gp78 (also known as autocrine motility factor receptor [AMFR]), an ER (endoplasmic reticulum) membrane-anchored ubiquitin ligase, has been identified as the E3 that ubiquitinates HMGCR [10, 11]. Through its transmembrane domain, gp78 interacts with another ER membrane protein, Insig-1or Insig-2 [11]. When the cholesterol level is low, HMGCR is kept apart from the Insig-gp78 complex and stabilized. A high level of sterol promotes the interaction between HMGCR and Insig-1/-2, which causes the ubiquitination of HMGCR by gp78 and subsequent degradation [11]. So it has been hypothesized that gp78 may suppress cholesterol biosynthesis by targeting HMGCR to degradation. Besides HMGCR, gp78 also mediates the degradation of Insig-1 protein. Destruction of Insig-1 releases its inhibition on SREBP and stimulates the expression of lipogenic genes. Thus, gp78 has opposite effects on lipid biosynthesis [12].

Originally, gp78 was identified as the tumor autocrine motility factor receptor that mediates tumor invasion and metastasis [13, 14]. The transcript for gp78 is widely expressed in a variety of tissues, and immunoblot analysis with a monoclonal antibody indicates that an increase in levels of gp78 correlates with the metastatic potential of a variety of human tumors. GP78 was very essential for the synthesis of cholesterol process. Cholesterol levels have a causal role in the development of cardiovascular disease. The aim of the present study was to assess the association between the human gp78 gene and CAD.

Methods

Ethical approval of the study protocol

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University (Urumqi, China). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. All participants explicitly provided permission for DNA analyses as well as collection of relevant clinical data. It was conducted according to the standards of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Subjects

The subjects were from a Han population and a Uygur population who lived in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China. All patients and controls had a differential diagnosis for chest pain encountered in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory of First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from 2006 to 2013. All of the procedures of coronary angiography were undertaken by highly skilled physicians using the Judkins approach. The findings of coronary angiography were interpreted by at least two experienced imaging specialists and the final diagnosis of CAD was made according to the angiography report.

We selected randomly 602 Han patients and 374 Uygur patients with CAD and a control group of 572 and 376, respectively, of ethnically and geographically matched individuals. CAD diagnosed by angiography, which was defined as the presence of at least one significant coronary artery stenosis of ≥50% luminal diameter on coronary angiography. All control subjects also underwent a coronary angiogram and have no coronary artery stenoses and did not show clinical or electrocardiogram evidence of myocardial infarction (MI) or CAD. Control subjects were not healthy individuals, some of them have hypertension, some of them have diabetes mellitus (DM), some of them have hyperlipidemia, which means the control group were exposed to the same risk factors of CAD while the results of coronary angiogram is normal. Data and information about traditional coronary risk factors, including hypertension, DM, and smoking, were collected from all study participants. Hypertension was defined as having a systolic blood pressure above140 mmHg or/and diastolic blood pressure above 90 mmHg or any anti-hypertensive agent used. Diabetes mellitus was diagnosed according to the criteria of the American Diabetes Association [15]. In addition, individuals with fasting plasma glucose >7.0 mmol/L or with a history of diabetes or treatment with insulin were considered diabetic. Smoking was classified as smokers (including current and ex-smokers) or non-smokers. All patients with impaired renal function, malignancy, connective tissue disease, valvular disease or chronic inflammatory disease were excluded.

Blood collection and DNA extraction

Fasting Blood samples drawn by venepuncture in the catheter-room were taken from all participants before cardiac catheterization. The blood samples were drawn into a 5 ml ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) tube and centrifuged at 4000 × g for 5 min to separate the plasma content. Genomic DNA was extracted from the peripheral leukocytes using standard phenol–chloroform method. The DNA samples were stored at −80°C until use. While used, the DNA was diluted to 50 ng/uL concentration.

Genotyping

The gp78 gene spans 64. 08 kb, in this study using the Haploview 4.2 software and the HapMap phrase II database, we identified three tag SNPs (rs731119, rs2617842 and rs2440472) by using minor allele frequency (MAF) ≤0.1 and linkage disequilibrium patterns with r2 ≥ 0.5 as a cut off. The position of the SNP1, SNP2 and SNP3 (rs731119, rs2617842 and rs2440472) was by order of increasing distance from the GP78 gene 5`end [Figure 1].
Figure 1

Structure of the human GP78 gene. This gene consists of 14 exons separated by 13 introns. Boxes indicate exons, and lines indicate introns and intergenic regions. Arrows mark the locations of polymorphisms.

Genotyping was undertaken using the TaqMan® SNP Genotyping Assay (Applied Bio systems). The primers and probes used in the TaqMan® SNP Genotyping Assays (ABI) were chosen based on information at the ABI website (http://myscience.appliedbiosystems.com). Thermal cycling was done using the Applied Biosystems7900HT Standard Real-Time PCR System. Plates were read on Sequence Detection Systems (SDS) automation controller software v2.3 (ABI).PCR amplification was performed using 2.5 μl of TaqMan Universal Master Mix, 0.15 μl probes and 1.85 ddH2O in a 6-μl final reaction volume containing 1μlDNA.Thermal cycling conditions were as follows: 95°C for 5 min; 40 cycles of 95°C for 15 s; and 60°C for 1 min. All 96 wells Plates were read on Sequence Detection Systems (SDS) automation controller software v2.3 (ABI).

Biochemical analysis

Serum concentrations of total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), glucose (Glu), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), Creatinine (Cr), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), were measured using standard methods in the Central Laboratory of First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University.

Statistical analysis

All continuous variables are expressed as means ± standard deviation (S.D.). The difference between the CAD and Control groups was analyzed using an independent-sample T-Test. The differences in the frequencies of smoking, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and GP78 genotypes were analyzed using χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test where appropriate. Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium was assessed by χ2 analysis. Logistic regression analyses with effect ratios (odds ratio [OR] and 95% CI) were used to assess the contribution of the major risk factors. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Institute, Chicago, USA). P-values of less than 0.05 were considered to statistically significant.

Results

Table 1 shows the clinical characteristics of the study participants. For Han and Uygur population, there was no significant difference in age between CAD patients and control subjects it means the study was age-matched case–control study. In the Han and Uygur population, for total, men, and women, the plasma concentration of Glu, and the prevalence of essential hypertension (EH), and diabetes mellitus (DM), were significantly higher for patients with CAD than for control participants. In the Han population, for total and men, body mass index (BMI),and smoking were significantly higher for patients with CAD than for control participants. The LCL were significantly higher for patients with CAD than for control participants only in the Han population for total. In the Uygur population, for total and men the HDL were significantly lower for patients with CAD than for control participants. The smoking were significantly higher for patients with CAD than for control participants in the Uygur population for total.
Table 1

Characteristics of study participants

 

Han

Uigur

 

CAD patients

Total control subjects

p value

CAD patients

Men control subjects

p value

CAD patients

Women control subjects

p value

CAD patients

Total control subjects

p value

CAD patients

Men control subjects

p value

CAD patients

Women control subjects

p value

Number (n)

602

572

 

388

341

 

214

231

 

374

376

 

279

225

 

95

151

 

Age (years)

60.94 ± 9.18

60.25 ± 8.37

0.18

59.60 ± 9.628

59.70 ± 8.905

0.88

60.18 ± 8.58

61.44 ± 8.38

0.12

59.24 ± 7.72

58.96 ± 7.28

0.61

58.79 ± 7.65

59.36 ± 7.24

0.4

58.97 ± 8.07

59.46 ± 7.97

0.64

BMI (kg/m2)

27.15 ± 3.21

26.03 ± 2.67

0.000*

26.96 ± 2.57

26.31 ± 3.01

0.002*

25.15 ± 3.02

25.61 ± 3.46

0.14

26.91 ± 3.39

26.76 ± 4.59

0.61

27.0 ± 3.39

26.74 ± 4.86

0.48

26.65 ± 3.40

26.79 ± 4.17

0.77

Pulse (beats/min)

74.02 ± 8.17

74.62 ± 7.86

0.2

74.03 ± 8.407

75.28 ± 7.776

0.04

74.01 ± 7.74

73.65 ± 7.90

0.62

75.88 ± 10.62

71.33 ± 9.51

0.000*

74.96 ± 10.39

71.25 ± 9.92

0.000*

78.59 ± 10.88

71.44 ± 8.89

0.000*

Glu (mmol/L)

6.24 ± 2.42

5.60 ± 1.65

0.000*

6.03 ± 2.15

5.68 ± 1.73

0.016*

6.62 ± 2.81

5.47 ± 1.50

0.000*

6.11 ± 2.64

5.10 ± 1.79

0.000*

6.11 ± 2.68

5.11 ± 1.82

0.000*

6.13 ± 2.53

5.09 ± 1.76

0.000*

TG (mmol/L)

1.97 ± 1.28

1.93 ± 1.33

0.63

1.94 ± 1.55

2.03 ± 1.42

0.36

2.02 ± 1.49

1.84 ± 1.54

0.20

1.95 ± 1.08

1.82 ± 2.41

0.36

1.92 ± 1.08

2.01 ± 2.99

0.68

2.05 ± 1.09

1.55 ± 1.08

0.001*

TC (mmol/L)

4.27 ± 1.11

4.31 ± 0.98

0.46

4.12 ± 1.05

4.22 ± 0.95

0.21

4.52 ± 1.17

4.45 ± 0.99

0.48

4.30 ± 1.07

4.35 ± 1.11

0.51

4.20 ± 0.95

4.37 ± 1.24

0.1

4.60 ± 1.35

4.33 ± 0.89

0.11

HDL (mmol/L)

1.13 ± 0.36

1.15 ± 0.38

0.29

1.08 ± 0.33

1.10 ± 0.39

0.56

1.22 ± 0.38

1.24 ± 0.35

0.63

0.97 ± 0.43

1.15 ± 0.69

0.000*

0.94 ± 0.28

1.14 ± 0.76

0.000*

1.07 ± 0.71

1.18 ± 0.58

0.2

LDL (mmol/L)

2.69 ± 1.09

2.53 ± 0.92

0.009*

2.61 ± 0.98

2.53 ± 0.92

0.33

2.84 ± 1.26

2.53 ± 0.92

0.04

2.63 ± 1.01

2.70 ± 0.96

0.34

2.59 ± 1.02

2.66 ± 0.93

0.48

2.72 ± 0.98

2.76 ± 1.00

0.8

Cr (mmol/L)

76.37 ± 23.92

74.06 ± 17.93

0.06

81.62 ± 24.68

79.36 ± 16.55

0.14

66.85 ± 19.14

66.18 ± 16.99

0.7

74.49 ± 23.16

70.54 ± 18.75

0.03

78.43 ± 21.39

77.43 ± 16.35

0.63

63.03 ± 24.39

57.99 ± 16.22

0.12

BUN (mmol/L)

5.33 ± 1.68

5.22 ± 1.73

0.22

5.42 ± 1.67

5.44 ± 1.65

0.89

5.18 ± 1.69

4.89 ± 1.78

0.07

5.29 ± 1.74

5.07 ± 1.53

0.12

5.27 ± 1.71

5.33 ± 1.475

0.72

5.33 ± 1.81

4.59 ± 1.52

0.01

EH (%)

56.9

46.9

0.001*

54.5

46.0

0.022*

61.2

48.1

0.005*

52.3

39.6

0.001*

49.3

37.3

0.007*

61.1

43

0.006*

DM (%)

26.6

11.7

0.001*

24.0

14.7

0.002*

31.3

7.4

0.000*

18.8

6.4

0.000*

18.8

7.1

0.000*

21.1

5.3

0.000*

Smoke (%)

42.6

35.1

0.00*

69.3

58.1

0.002*

4.2

1.3

0.06

44.9

32.4

0.000*

59.9

53.8

0.17

1.1

0.7

0.74

BMI, body mass index; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; Cr, creatinine; Glu, glucose; TG, triglyceride; TC, total cholesterol; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; EH, essential hypertension; DM, diabetes mellitus.

Continuous variable were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. P value of continuous variables was calculated by independent T-T test.

The P value of categorical variable was calculated by Fisher’s exact test. *P<0.05.

Table 2 shows the distribution of genotypes and alleles of SNP1, SNP2 and SNP3 for the GP78 gene, (Table 2: Han population; Table 3: Uygur population). The genotype distributions for each of the SNPs were in agreement with the predicted Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium values (data not shown). In the Han population, for total and man, the distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) genotypes showed a significant difference between CAD and control participants (for total:P = 0.008, for males: P = 0.007). The distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) alleles and the dominant model (AA vs AG + GG) and recessive model (GG vs AG + AA) showed a significant difference between CAD and control participants (for allele: P = 0.003 and P = 0.002, respectively; for dominant model: P = 0.041 and P = 0.026, respectively; for recessive model: p = 0.004 and p = 0.004, respectively). G allele of rs2440472 was significantly higher in CAD patients than in control participants (total: 48.3% vs 42.2%; men: 48.1% vs 38.9%). And the A allele of rs2440472 was significantly lower in CAD patients than in control participants (total: 51.7% vs 57.8%; males: 51.9% vs 39.9%). The recessive model (GG vs AG + AA) of rs2440472 was significantly higher in CAD patients than in control participants (total: 23.9% vs 17.1%; men: 24.5% vs 15.8%). The dominant model (AA vs AG + GG)of rs2440472 was significantly lower in CAD patients than in control participants (total: 27.2% vs 32.7%; males: 28.4% vs 36.1%). For the Uygur population, the distribution of the three SNPs genotypes and alleles showed no significant difference between the CAD patients and control subjects.
Table 2

Genotype and allele distributions in patients with CAD and control subjects (Han population)

 

Total

Men

Women

 

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

rs731119 (SNP1)

Genotype

 

G/G

369 (60.8)

375 (64.1)

0.236

237 (61.2)

227 (63.9)

0.695

132 (60)

148 (64.3)

0.283

A/A

21 (3.5)

26 (4.4)

11 (2.8)

11 (3.1)

10 (4.5)

15 (6.5)

A/G

217 (35.7)

184 (31.5)

139 (35.9)

117 (33)

78 (35.5)

67 (29.1)

 

Dominant model

GG

369 (60.8)

375 (64.1)

0.238

237 (61.2)

227 (63.9)

0.447

132 (60)

148 (64.3)

0.342

AG + AA

238 (39.2)

210 (35.9)

150 (38.8)

128 (36.1)

88 (40)

82 (35.7)

Recessive model

AA

21 (3.5)

26 (4.4)

0.382

11 (2.8)

11 (3.1)

0.837

10 (4.5)

15 (6.5)

0.36

AG + GG

572 (99.83)

455 (100)

376 (97.2)

344 (96.9)

210 (95.5)

215 (93.5)

Additive model

AG

217 (35.7)

184 (31.5)

0.117

139 (35.9)

117 (33)

0.447

78 (35.5)

67 (29.1)

0.342

GG + AA

390 (64.3)

401 (68.5)

237 (61.2)

227 (63.9)

132 (60)

148 (64.3)

Allele

 

G

955 (78.7)

934 (79.8)

0.484

613 (79.2)

571 (80.4)

0.558

342 (77.7)

363 (78.9)

0.666

A

259 (21.3)

236 (20.2)

161 (20.8)

139 (19.6)

98 (22.3)

97 (21.1)

rs2617849 (SNP2)

Genotype

 

T/T

222 (39.9)

181 (38.8)

0.046

132 (37.8)

102 (31.1)

0.159

90 (43.3)

79 (35.3)

0.234

C/C

74 (13.3)

87 (15.8)

49 (14)

56 (17.1)

25 (12)

31 (13.8)

C/T

261 (46.9)

284 (51.4)

168 (48.1)

170 (51.8)

93 (44.7)

114 (50.9)

 

Dominant model

TT

222 (39.9)

181 (38.8)

0.014*

132 (37.8)

102 (31.1)

0.066

90 (43.3)

79 (35.3)

0.89

CC + CT

335 (60.1)

371 (67.2)

217 (62.2)

226 (68.9)

118 (56.7)

145 (64.7)

Recessive model

CC

74 (13.3)

87 (15.8)

0.242

49 (51.9)

56 (17.1)

0.276

25 (12)

31 (13.8)

0.574

TT + CT

483 (86.7)

465 (84.2)

300 (86)

272 (82.9)

183 (88)

193 (86.2)

Additive model

CT

261 (46.9)

284 (51.4)

0.126

168 (48.1)

170 (51.8)

0.337

93 (44.7)

114 (50.9)

0.199

CC + TT

296 (53.1)

268 (48.6)

181 (51.9)

158 (48.2)

115 (55.3)

110 (49.1)

Allele

 

C

409 (37.7)

458 (41.5)

0.021*

266 (38.1)

282 (43)

0.068

143 (34.4)

176 (39.3)

0.135

T

705 (63.3)

646 (58.5)

432 (61.9)

374 (57)

273 (65.6)

272 (60.7)

rs2440472 (SNP3)

Genotype

 

A/A

164 (27.2)

187 (32.7)

0.008*

110 (28.4)

123 (36.1)

0.007*

54 (25.2)

64 (27.7)

0.582

G/G

144 (23.9)

98 (17.1)

95 (24.5)

54 (15.8)

49 (22.9)

44 (19)

A/G

294 (48.8)

287 (50.2)

183 (47.2)

164 (48.1)

111 (51.9)

123 (53.2)

 

Dominant model

A/A

164 (27.2)

187 (32.7)

0.041*

110 (28.4)

123 (36.1)

0.026*

54 (25.2)

64 (27.7)

0.555

GG + AG

438 (72.8)

385 (67.3)

278 (71.6)

218 (63.9)

160 (74.8)

167 (72.3)

Recessive model

GG

144 (23.9)

98 (17.1)

0.004*

95 (24.5)

54 (15.8)

0.004*

49 (22.9)

44 (19)

0.318

AA + AG

458 (76.1)

474 (82.9)

293 (75.5)

287 (84.2)

165 (77.1)

187 (81)

Additive model

AG

294 (48.8)

287 (50.2)

0.647

183 (47.2)

164 (48.1)

0.802

111 (51.9)

123 (53.2)

0.771

AA + GG

308 (51.2)

285 (49.8)

205 (52.8)

177 (51.9)

103 (48.1)

108 (46.8)

Allele

 

A

622 (51.7)

661 (57.8)

0.003*

403 (51.9)

410 (60.1)

0.002*

219 (51.2)

251 (54.3)

0.345

   

G

582 (48.3)

483 (42.2)

 

373 (48.1)

272 (39.9)

 

209 (48.8)

211 (45.7)

 

CAD, coronary artery disease.

The P value of genotype was calculated by Fisher’s exact test. *P<0.05.

Table 3

Genotype and allele distributions in patients with CAD and control subjects (Uygur population)

 

Total

Men

Women

 

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

CAD n (%)

Control n (%)

P value

rs731119 (SNP1)

Genotype

 

G/G

269 (63)

244 (64.4)

0.811

202 (62.7)

146 (63.8)

0.873

67 (63.8)

98 (65.3)

0.968

A/A

18 (4.2)

18 (4.7)

12 (3.7)

10 (4.4)

6 (5.7)

8 (5.3)

A/G

140 (32.8)

117 (30.9)

108 (33.5)

73 (31.9)

32 (30.5)

44 (29.3)

 

Dominant model

GG

269 (63)

244 (64.4)

0.684

202 (62.7)

146 (63.8)

0.806

67 (63.8)

98 (65.3)

0.802

AG + AA

158 (37)

135 (35.6)

120 (37.3)

83 (36.2)

38 (36.2)

52 (34.7)

Recessive model

AA

18 (4.2)

18 (4.7)

0.714

12 (3.7)

10 (4.4)

0.705

6 (5.7)

8 (5.3)

0.895

AG + GG

409 (95.8)

361 (95.3)

310 (96.3)

219 (95.6)

99 (94.3)

142 (94.7)

Additive model

AG

140 (32.8)

117 (30.9)

0.56

108 (33.5)

73 (31.9)

0.682

32 (30.5)

44 (29.3)

0.844

GG + AA

287 (67.2)

262 (69.1)

214 (66.5)

156 (68.1)

73 (69.5)

106 (70.7)

Allele

 

G

678 (79.4)

605 (79.8)

0.833

512 (79.5)

365 (79.7)

0.938

166 (79)

240 (80)

0.793

A

176 (20.6)

153 (20.2)

132 (20.5)

93 (20.3)

44 (21)

60 (20)

rs2617849 (SNP2)

Genotype

 

T/T

152 (39.7)

128 (35.4)

0.576

120 (42.6)

78 (36.1)

0.346

32 (31.7)

50 (34.2)

0.869

C/C

57 (14.9)

58 (16)

36 (12.8)

31 (14.4)

21 (20.8)

27 (18.5)

C/T

174 (45.4)

176 (48.6)

126 (44.7)

107 (49.5)

48 (47.5)

69 (47.3)

 

Dominant model

TT

152 (39.7)

128 (35.4)

0.223

120 (42.6)

78 (36.1)

0.145

32 (31.7)

50 (34.2)

0.674

CC + CT

231 (60.3)

234 (64.6)

162 (57.4)

138 (63.9)

69 (68.3)

96 (65.8)

Recessive model

CC

57 (14.9)

58 (16)

0.667

36 (12.8)

31 (14.4)

0.607

21 (20.8)

27 (18.5)

0.653

TT + CT

326 (85.1)

304 (84)

246 (87.2)

185 (85.6)

80 (79.2)

119 (81.5)

Additive model

CT

174 (45.4)

176 (48.6)

0.384

126 (44.7)

107 (49.5)

0.282

48 (47.5)

69 (47.3)

0.967

CC + TT

209 (54.6)

186 (51.4)

156 (55.3)

109 (50.5)

53 (52.5)

77 (52.7)

Allele

 

C

288 (37.6)

292 (40.3)

0.279

198 (35.1)

169 (39.1)

0.193

90 (44.6)

123 (42.1)

0.592

T

478 (62.4)

432 (59.7)

366 (64.9)

263 (60.9)

112 (55.4)

169 (57.9)

rs2440472 (SNP3)

Genotype

 

A/A

85 (22.7)

78 (20.7)

0.269

57 (20.4)

43 (19.1)

0.316

28 (29.5)

35 (23.2)

0.513

G/G

120 (32.1)

106 (28.2)

94 (33.7)

64 (28.4)

26 (27.4)

42 (27.8)

A/G

169 (45.2)

192 (51.1)

128 (45.9)

118 (52.4)

41 (43.2)

74 (49)

 

Dominant model

A/A

85 (22.7)

78 (20.7)

0.51

57 (20.4)

43 (19.1)

o.712

28 (29.5)

35 (23.2)

0.271

GG + AG

289 (77.3)

298 (79.3)

222 (79.6)

182 (80.9)

67 (70.5)

116 (76.8)

Recessive model

GG

120 (32.1)

106 (28.2)

0.245

94 (33.7)

64 (28.4)

0.207

26 (27.4)

42 (27.8)

0.939

AA + AG

254 (67.9)

270 (71.8)

185 (66.3)

161 (71.6)

69 (72.6)

109 (72.2)

Additive model

AG

169 (45.2)

192 (51.1)

0.107

128 (45.9)

118 (52.4)

0.143

41 (43.2)

74 (49)

0.371

AA + GG

205 (54.8)

184 (48.9)

151 (54.1)

107 (47.6)

54 (56.8)

77 (51)

Allele

 

A

339 (45.3)

348 (46.3)

0.71

242 (43.4)

204 (45.3)

0.533

97 (51.1)

144 (47.7)

0.467

   

G

409 (54.7)

404 (53.7)

 

316 (56.6)

246 (54.7)

 

93 (48.9)

158 (52.3)

 

CAD, coronary artery disease.

The P value of genotype was calculated by Fisher’s exact test. *P<0.05.

Table 4 shows that multiple logistic regression analyses were done with Glu, EH, DM, BMI,LDL, and smoking because these variables were the major confounding factors for CAD, (Table 4: In dominant model; Table 5: In recessive model. For total and men, the significant difference of rs2440472 in both models was retained after adjustment for Glu, EH, DM, BMI, LDL, and smoking in Han population (for dominant model OR: 0.760, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.584-0.99, P = 0.042; OR:0.686, 95% CI: 0.498-0.946, P = 0.022, respectively; for recessive model OR:1.451, 95% CI: 1.067-1.974, P = 0.018; OR:1.789, 95% CI: 1.219-2.627, P = 0.000, respectively).
Table 4

Multiple logistic regression analysis for CAD patients and control subjects of Han population in dominent model

 

Total

Men

Women

 

OR

95% CI

P

OR

95% CI

P

OR

95% CI

P

Dominent model (AA vs AG + GG)

0.76

0.584–0.99

0.042*

0.686

0.498–0.946

0.022*

1.027

0.64–1.647

0.913

Glu

1.1

1.027–1.178

0.006*

1.062

0.974–1.158

0.172

1.152

1.021–1.299

0.021

BMI

1.134

1.086–1.183

0.000*

1.099

1.039–1.162

0.001*

1.182

1.103–1.267

0.000*

EH

1.307

1.024–1.669

0.032*

1.244

0.918–1.685

0.159

1.377

0.9–2.106

0.14

LDL

1.131

1.002–1.277

0.046*

1.045

0.891–1.225

0.59

1.311

1.075–1.6

0.008*

DM

2.185

1.542–3.098

0.000*

1.637

1.07–2.505

0.023*

4.265

2.239–8.123

0.000*

Smoking

1.657

1.295–2.12

0.000*

1.674

1.223–2.291

0.001*

2.259

0.516–9.895

0.28

EH, essential hypertension; DM, diabetes mellitus; CAD, coronary artery disease; BMI, body mass index; Glu, glucose; LDL, low density lipoprotein.

*P<0.05.

Table 5

Multiple logistic regression analysis for CAD patients and control subjects of Han population in recessive model

 

Total

Men

Women

 

OR

95% CI

P

OR

95% CI

P

OR

95% CI

P

Recessive model (GGvsAG + AA)

1.451

1.067–1.974

0.018*

1.789

1.219–2.627

0.000*

1.024

0.604–1.736

0.929

Glu

1.098

1.024–1.177

0.009*

1.058

0.97–1.154

0.2

1.152

1.021–1.299

0.021

BMI

1.136

1.089–1.185

0.000*

1.098

1.038–1.161

0.000*

1.182

1.103–1.267

0.000*

EH

1.311

1.026–1.676

0.03*

1.42

1.03–1.932

0.026*

1.377

0.9–2.106

0.14

LDL

1.214

1.038–1.42

0.015*

1.015

0.864–1.192

0.856

1.307

1.068–1.601

0.009*

DM

2.225

1.565–3.162

0.000*

1.842

1.197–2.834

0.005*

4.251

2.238–8.073

0.000*

Smoking

1.633

1.274–2.093

0.000*

1.703

1.242–2.333

0.000*

2.279

0.524–9.916

0.272

EH, essential hypertension; DM, diabetes mellitus; CAD, coronary artery disease; BMI, body mass index; Glu, glucose; LDL, low density lipoprotein.

*P<0.05.

Table 6 shows the patterns of linkage disequilibrium in the GP78 gene with their |D′| and r2 values. All three SNPs were located in one haplotype block because all the |D′| values were >0.5.r2 values of the three SNPs were all <0.5, it means the three SNPs can not replace each other [16, 17]. We then used the three SNPs to establish haplotypes in Han subjects in order of SNP1-SNP2-SNP3.
Table 6

Pairwise linkage disequilibrium (| D’| above diagonal and r 2 below diagonal) for the three SNPs

  

| D’|

  

CAD

Control

 

SNP

SNP1

SNP2

SNP3

SNP1

SNP2

SNP3

r2

SNP1

 

0.965

0.961

 

0.99

0.99

SNP2

0.155

 

0.922

0.176

 

0.99

 

SNP3

0.267

0.492

 

0.363

0.485

 
Table 7 shows the distribution of haplotypes in CAD patient and control participants. We found eight haplotypes in all subjects. The overall distribution of the haplotypes were significantly different between the CAD patients and the control subjects (all P = 0.001). For total and male,the frequency of the 001(G-T-G) haplotype was significantly higher for CAD patients than for control subjects (P = 0.02 and P = 0.0048). In addition, the frequency of the 010(G-C-A) haplotype was lower in the CAD patients than in the control subjects in total (P = 0.0443).
Table 7

The distubution of haplotype in CAD patient and control participants

 

Total

Men

Women

 

CAD (%)

Control (%)

Pvalue

CAD (%)

Control (%)

Pvalue

CAD (%)

Control (%)

Pvalue

1

100

A T A

0.3

0

-

0.4

0

-

0

0

-

2

101

A T G

21.2

20.2

0.495

20.8

19.7

0.52

21.8

21

0.738

3

010

G C A

36.2

41

0.044

36.5

42.4

0.058

35.8

38.8

0.386

4

000

G T A

15.1

16.6

0.422

14.5

17.7

0.154

16.2

15

0.619

5

001

G T G

26.2

22.2

0.02

26.4

20.2

0.005

25.9

25.2

0.816

6

110

A C A

0

0

-

0

0

-

2.34

2.02

0.354

7

111

A C G

0.3

-

-

0.3

0

-

0.3

0

-

8

011

G C G

0.7

-

-

1.1

0

-

-

-

-

The P value of genotype was calculated by Fisher’s exact test, and revised by False discovery rate. *P<0.05; 0 represent Maximum gene frequency, 1 represent Minimum gene frequency.

The P value of each haplotype by the order of SNP1-SNP2-SNP3 is relative to the other haplotypes as a group (overall P =0.001).

Table 8 shows the distribution of genotypes and alleles of SNP1, SNP2 and SNP3 for the GP78 gene between the Han and Uygur populations. In the CAD group, for total and man, the distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) genotypes and allele showed a significant difference between Han and Uygur population (genotypes: for total: P = 0.008, for males: P = 0.011; allel: for total: P = 0.006, for males: P = 0.002). In the Control group, for total and man, the distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) genotypes and allele showed a significant difference between Han and Uygur population (genotypes: for total: P = 0.00, for males: P = 0.00; allel: for total: P = 0.00, for males: P = 0.00). In the CAD group, GG genotype and G allele of rs2440472 was significantly higher in Han population than Uygur population. In the Control group, GG genotype and G allele of rs2440472 was significantly lower in Han population than Uygur population.
Table 8

Genotype and allele distributions between Han and Uygur population

 

CAD

Control

 

Total

Men

Women

Total

Men

Women

 

Han n

Uygur n

P value

Han n

Uygur n

P value

Han n

Uygur n

P value

Han n

Uygur n

P value

Han n

Uygur n

P value

Han n

Uygur n

P value

rs731119 (SNP1)

Genotype

G/G

369

269

0.545

237

202

0.68

132

67

0.642

375

244

0.96

227

146

0.714

148

98

0.893

A/A

21

18

11

12

10

6

26

18

11

10

15

8

A/G

217

140

139

108

78

32

184

117

117

73

15

8

Allele

G

955

678

0.69

613

512

0.888

342

166

0.703

934

605

0.99

571

365

0.761

363

240

0.718

A

259

176

161

132

98

44

236

153

139

93

97

60

rs2617849 (SNP2)

Genotype

T/T

222

152

0.772

132

120

0.159

90

32

0.234

181

128

0.68

102

78

0.422

79

50

0.476

C/C

74

57

49

36

25

21

87

58

56

31

31

27

C/T

261

174

168

126

93

48

284

176

 

170

107

114

69

Allele

C

409

288

0.697

266

198

0.271

143

90

0.014

458

292

0.62

282

169

0.205

176

123

0.442

T

705

478

432

366

273

112

646

432

374

263

272

169

rs2440472 (SNP3)

Genotype

A/A

164

85

0.008*

110

57

0.011*

54

28

0.582

187

78

0.00*

123

43

0.00*

64

35

0.125

G/G

144

120

95

94

49

26

98

106

54

64

44

42

A/G

294

169

183

128

111

41

287

192

164

118

123

74

Allele

A

622

339

0.006*

403

242

0.002*

219

97

0.979

661

348

0.00*

410

204

0.00*

251

144

0.072

  

G

582

409

 

373

316

 

209

93

 

483

404

 

272

246

 

211

158

 

CAD, coronary artery disease.

The P value of genotype was calculated by Fisher’s exact test. *P<0.05.

Discussion

Cholesterol is an essential component of most biological membranes and is the precursor for synthesis of steroid hormones and bile acids. However, high levels of cholesterol cause severe problems including coronary heart disease [18]. Cholesterol is synthesized from acetyl-CoA through a cascade of enzymatic reactions. The biosynthesis of cholesterol is tightly regulated, mainly through two feedback regulatory mechanisms: sterol-regulated degradation of HMG-CoA reductase (HMGCR) and maturation of sterol-regulatory element-binding protein(SREBP) [19]. Sterol-regulated degradation of 3-hydroxy-3-methy-lglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) is a rapid feedback regulatory mechanism by which cell semploy to control the cholesterol biosynthesis. This process is initiated by the sterol induced interaction between HMGCR and Insig-1/gp78, a membrane-bound ubiquitin ligase complex [20]. When the concentration of cellular sterol is high, the membrane domain of HMGCR can sense the excessive sterols and the whole protein is rapidly degraded, therefore the cholesterol biosynthesis is shut down [21]. This sterol promotes the degradation of HMGCR through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, and therefore slows down cholesterol biosynthesis [9]. This was very important negatively feedback regulatory mechanism that cells use to control their cholesterol level. Sterol regulatory element-binding proteins (SREBPs) are major transcription factors activating the expression of genes involved in biosynthesis of cholesterol, fatty acid and triglyceride [22]. The SREBP is first synthesized as membrane bound transcription precursor (pre-SREBP), which forms a complex with SREBP cleavage-activating protein (SCAP). When cellular cholesterol level is high, Insig-1/-2 binds SCAP and retains the SCAP-SREBP complex in ER [23]. When the cholesterol level is low, SCAP dissociates from Insig-1/-2 and escorts SREBP to Golgi to undergo protease cleavages. The released N-terminal transcriptional domain of SREBP (nSREBP) enters the nucleus to activate transcription of genes encoding proteins in lipid biosynthesis and uptake. Meanwhile, Insig-1 is ubiquitinated by gp78 and degraded, therefore creating a rapid and convergent regulation on cholesterol biosynthesis and uptake [24, 25]. From this angle, degradation of Insig-1 by gp78 should release the inhibition on SREBP and increase the biosynthesis of lipid.

The essential function of the gp78 in the cholesterol synthesise process was ubiquitination, that is a process during which proteins are modified with a single ubiquitin or a chain of ubiquitin monomers. It occurs through a cascading action of E1 ubiquitin-activating enzyme, E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme and then E3 ubiquitin ligase [26]. Bao-Liang Song and his colleagues found gp78 as the ubiquitin ligase (E3) that initiates sterol-dependent degradation of reductase, and Insig-1 as a bridge between gp78/VCP and the reductase substrate [11]. DeBose-Boyd and coworkers have shown that sterols induce the binding of ER-embedded HMG CoA reductase to Insig-1, and this interaction induces the ubiquitination and degradation of the reductase [27]. Later, they have shown that ubiquitination is mediated by gp78, which forms a complex with Insig-1 [11]. In the presence of sterols, this bound gp78 ubiquitinates HMG CoA reductase. It is tempting to speculate that in the absence of sterols, when neither Scap nor HMG CoA reductase is bound to Insig-1, gp78 ubiquitinates Insig-1, accelerating its degradation. When sterols induce HMGCoA reductase to bind to Insig-1, the ubiquitination reaction is diverted toward HMG CoA reductase, on the other hand, when sterols induce Scap to bind to Insig-1, the gp78 no longer ubiquitinates Insig-1. Perhaps Scap displaces gp78 from Insig-1 in a sterol dependent reaction [25]. In sterol-depleted cells, cholesterol dissociates from the Scap/SREBP complex, and this causes Insig-1 to dissociates well. The liberated Insig-1 undergoes ubiquitination by gp78 at lysines 156 and 158, which leads to proteasomal degradation. The liberated Scap/SREBP complex binds to COPII proteins, which cluster it into COPII-coated vesicles for transport to the Golgi [28]. In the Golgi, the SREBP is processed by proteases to release the transcriptionally active NH2-terminal domain, which moves to the nucleus, where it activates transcription of all of the genes that encode enzymes required for cholesterol synthesis and for uptake through the LDL receptor [29]. It means that gp78 gene promotes the synthesis of cholesterol.

In the Han population, for total and men, there was a significant difference in the genotypic distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) between CAD patients and control subjects, the distribution of SNP3 (rs2440472) alleles and the dominant model (AA vs AG + GG) and recessive model (GG vs AG + AA) showed a significant difference between CAD and control participants. G allele and the recessive model (GG vs AG + AA) of rs2440472 was significantly higher in CAD patients than in control participants, A allele and the dominant model(AA vs AG + GG)of rs2440472 was significantly lower in CAD patients than in control participants. The significant difference in the two models of SNP3 between CAD patients and control subjects was retained after adjustment for covariates such as Glu, BMI, EH, DM, LDL and smoking (Table 4). This indicated in Han population, for total and males, the risk of CAD was increased with the GG genotype of rs2440472, and the AA genotype of rs2440472 was lowering the risk of CAD. In our study we also identifying two susceptible haplotypes (G-T-G;G-C-A) in the Han population, this result is consistent with the distribution of genotype results that the GG genotype of rs2440472 is a risk factor of CAD and the AA genotype is a protective factor of CAD, because G allele and A alleles of SNP3 was involved in haplotypes 001 and 010. Although, the gp78 has opposite effects on lipid biosynthesis, but the net effect was to increase the biosynthesis of cholesterol [13]. We speculated that Han subjects with the GG genotype of rs2440472 (SNP3) and G-T-G haplotype may be make the gp78 gene have a high ability for synthesizing cholesterol, thus increasing the chances of CAD; in contrast, that with the AA genotype of rs2440472(SNP3) and G-C-A haplotype may be attenuate the synthesizing function of gp78 gene, which was decreasing the chances of CAD. For the Uygur population, we did not find an association between the three SNPs of the gp78 gene and CAD. In addition, in the Table 8 we have analysed the distribution of genotypes and alleles of SNP1, SNP2 and SNP3 for the GP78 gene between the Han and Uygur populations. From the table we can see both in the CAD and Control subjects the frequency of SNP3 (rs2440472) genotypes and alleles showed a significant difference between Han and Uygur population. We consult the national center for biotechnology information (NCBI) Web site then found the distribution of rs2440472 genotypes showed a significant difference between the European and Asian population. The Uygur population is one of the minorities residing mainly in northwest China (The Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China).They originate from intermarriage between Caucasians and Mongolians, and have their own language culture and the unique genetic background. The Han and Uygur are two different races, they has a different genetic background, maybe it was the reason why the distribution of rs2440472 genotypes have differences between the two populations.

In our study when analyzing men and women separately, there was only an association between the SNP3 (rs2440472) and CAD in men, however, in the women we did not find any association between the three SNPs of the gp78 gene and CAD. We can’t find any report about the gp78 gene and gender relation, so we unable to explain why there are gender differences in the distribution of genotypes, thus further studies are needed to explore this issue.

Conclusion

This was the first demonstration of the relationship between the gp78 gene polymorphisms and CAD. we found that rs2440472 may be a novel polymorphism of the gp78 gene associated with CAD in Han population in China. The GG genotype and G allele of rs2440472 in gp78 gene could be a risk genetic marker of CAD and the AA genotype and A allele may be a protective genetic marker of CAD in Han population in China, which supported the hypothesis that gp78 gene variations were involved in the pathogenesis of CAD. Certainly it needs further studies are warranted to replicate our results as well as elucidate the biological mechanism.

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81260041) and Xinjiang project of science and technology (No. 2013911111).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University
(2)
Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease Research

References

  1. Zee RY, Cheng S, Erlich HA, Lindpaintner K, Rifai N: Genetic variants of arachidonate 5-lipoxygenase-activating protein, and risk of incident myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke: a nested case–control approach. Stroke 2006, 37:2007–2011. 10.1161/01.STR.0000229905.25080.01View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Marenberg ME, Risch N, Berkman LF, Floderus B, De Faire U: Genetic susceptibility to death from coronary heart disease in a study of twins. N Engl J Med 1994, 330:1041–1046. 10.1056/NEJM199404143301503View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM: Ecacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 2005, 366:1267–1278.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Mackay J, Mensah GA: The Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.Google Scholar
  5. Law MR, Wald NJ, Rudnicka AR: Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br Med J 2003, 326:1423. 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1423View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Kuulasmaa K: Estimation of contribution of changes in classic risk factors to trends in coronary-event rates across the WHO MONICA Project populations. Lancet 2000, 355:675–687. 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)11180-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clarke R: Cholesterol fractions and apolipoproteins as risk factors for heart disease mortality in older men. Arch Intern Med 2007, 167:1373–1378. 10.1001/archinte.167.13.1373View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldstein JL, Brown MS: Regulation of the mevalonate pathway. Nature 1990, 343:425–430. 10.1038/343425a0View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. DeBose-Boyd RA: Feedback regulation of cholesterol synthesis: sterol-accelerated ubiquitination and degradation of HMG CoA reductase. Cell Res 2008, 18:609–621. 10.1038/cr.2008.61View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Song BL, Javitt NB, DeBose-Boyd RA: Insig-mediated degradation of HMG CoA reductase stimulated by lanosterol, an intermediate in the synthesis of cholesterol. Cell Metab 2005, 1:179–189. 10.1016/j.cmet.2005.01.001View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Song BL, Sever N, DeBose-Boyd RA: Gp78, a membrane-anchored ubiquitin ligase, associates with Insig-1 and couples sterol-regulated ubiquitination to degradation of HMG CoA reductase. Mol Cell 2005, 19:829–840. 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.08.009View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu TF, Tang JJ, Li PS, Shen Y, Li JG, Miao HH: Ablation of gp78 in liver improves hyperlipidemia and insulin resistance by inhibiting SREBP to decrease lipid biosynthesis. Cell Metab 2012,16(2):213–225. 10.1016/j.cmet.2012.06.014View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Watanabe H, Carmi P, Hogan V, Raz T, Silletti S, Nabi IR, Raz A: Purification of human tumor cell autocrine motility factor and molecular cloning of its receptor. J Biol Chem 1991, 266:13442–13448.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Shimizu K, Tani M, Watanabe H, Nagamachi Y, Niinaka Y, Shiroishi T, Ohwada S, Raz A, Yokota J: The autocrine motility factor receptor gene encodes a novel type of seven transmembrane protein. FEBS Lett 1999, 456:295–300. 10.1016/S0014-5793(99)00966-7View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. American Diabetes Association: Clinical practice recommendations. Diabetes Care 1997, 20:S1-S70.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Altshuler D, Brooks LD, Chakravarti A, Clark AG, Collins FS, Bentley DR: A haplotype map of human genome. Nature 2010, 467:1061–1073. 10.1038/nature09534View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Daly MJ, Rioux JD, Schaffner SF, Hudson TJ, Lander ES: High-resolution haplotype structure in the human genome. Nat Genet 2001, 29:229–232. 10.1038/ng1001-229View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ge L, Wang J, Qi W, Miao HH, Cao J, Xiu Y, Li BL, Song BL: The Cholesterol Absorption Inhibitor Ezetimibe Acts by Blocking the Sterol-Induced Internalization of NPC1L1. Cell Metab 2008, 7:508–519. 10.1016/j.cmet.2008.04.001View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldstein JL, DeBose-Boyd RA, Brown MS: Protein sensors for membrane sterols. Cell 2006, 124:35–46. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.12.022View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Miao HH, Jiang W, Ge L, Li BL, Song BL: Tetra-glutamic acid residues adjacent to Lys248 in HMG-CoA reductase are critical for the ubiquitination mediated by gp78 and UBE2G2. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin 2010, 42:303–310. 10.1093/abbs/gmq022View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gil G, Faust JR, Chin DJ, Goldstein JL, Brown MS: Membrane-bound domain of HMG CoA reductase is required for sterol-enhanced degradation of the enzyme. Cell 1985, 41:249–258. 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90078-9View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Matsuda M, Korn BS, Hammer RE, Moon YA, Komuro R, Horton JD, Goldstein JL, Brown MS, Shimomura I: SREBP cleavage-activating protein (SCAP) is required for increased lipid synthesis in liver induced by cholesterol deprivation and insulin elevation. Genes Dev 2001, 15:1206–1216. 10.1101/gad.891301View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Brown MS, Goldstein JL: The SREBP pathway:Regulation of chole-sterol metabolism by proteolysis of a membrane-bound transcription factor. Cell 1997, 89:331–340. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80213-5View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee JN, Song BL, DeBose-Boyd RA, Ye J: Sterol-regulated degradation of Insig-1 mediated by the membrane-bound ubiquitin ligase gp78. J Biol Chem 2006, 281:39308–39315. 10.1074/jbc.M608999200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gong Y, Lee JN, Lee PC, Goldstein JL, Brown MS, Ye J: Sterol-regulated ubiquitination and degradation of Insig-1 creates a convergent mechanism for feedback control of cholesterol synthesis and uptake. Cell Metab 2006, 3:15–24. 10.1016/j.cmet.2005.11.014View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Fang S, Weissman AM: A field guide to ubiquitylation. Cell Mol Life Sci 2004, 61:1546–1561.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sever N, Song BL, Yabe D, Goldstein JL, Brown MS, DeBose-Boyd RA: Insig-dependent ubiquitination and degradation of mammalian 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase stimulated by sterols and geranylgeraniol. J Biol Chem 2003, 278:52479–52490. 10.1074/jbc.M310053200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Sun LP, Li L, Goldstein JL, Brown MS: Insig required for sterol-mediated inhibition of Scap/SREBP binding to COPII proteins in vitro. J Biol Chem 2005, 280:26483–26490. 10.1074/jbc.M504041200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Horton JD, Goldstein JL, Brown MS: SREBPs:activators of the complete program of cholesterol and fatty acid synthesis in the liver. J Clin Invest 2002, 109:1125–1131. 10.1172/JCI0215593View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Cha et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement