2020
DOI: 10.1155/2020/9589310
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in XPO5 are Associated with Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in a Chinese Population

Abstract: Objectives. e purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in 3′UTR of XPO5 gene and the occurrence of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL), and to further explore the regulatory mechanism of miRNAs in NIHL on XPO5 gene. Methods.We conducted a case-control study involving 1040 cases and 1060 controls. e effects of SNPs on XPO5 expression were studied by genotyping, real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), cell transfection, and the dual-luciferase report… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(42 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This analysis of gene-by-environment interaction on NIHL is credible for some researchers have conducted similar studies [29,30]. The potential biological mechanism of this genetic variant on the disease development can be related to RNA modifications and immunodeficiency.…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 67%
“…This analysis of gene-by-environment interaction on NIHL is credible for some researchers have conducted similar studies [29,30]. The potential biological mechanism of this genetic variant on the disease development can be related to RNA modifications and immunodeficiency.…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 67%
“…In the article titled “Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in XPO5 are Associated with Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in a Chinese Population” [ 1 ], the information “Ning Wang, Boshen Wang contributed equally to this article” was omitted from the Authors' Contributions section. The corrected section appears below:…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%