We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our cookie policy.×
Skip main navigation
Open Drawer MenuClose Drawer Menu
Aging Health
Bioelectronics in Medicine
Biomarkers in Medicine
Breast Cancer Management
CNS Oncology
Colorectal Cancer
Concussion
Epigenomics
Future Cardiology
Future Medicine AI
Future Microbiology
Future Neurology
Future Oncology
Future Rare Diseases
Future Virology
Hepatic Oncology
HIV Therapy
Immunotherapy
International Journal of Endocrine Oncology
International Journal of Hematologic Oncology
Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine
Lung Cancer Management
Melanoma Management
Nanomedicine
Neurodegenerative Disease Management
Pain Management
Pediatric Health
Personalized Medicine
Pharmacogenomics
Regenerative Medicine
Priority Paper Evaluation

Silent SNPs: impact on gene function and phenotype

    Anton A Komar

    Cleveland State University, Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences, Cleveland, OH 44115, USA.

    Search for more papers by this author

    Email the corresponding author at a.komar@csuohio.edu

    Published Online:24 Aug 2007https://doi.org/10.2217/14622416.8.8.1075

    Abstract

    Evaluation of: Kimchi-Sarfaty C, Oh JM, Kim IW et al.: A ‘silent’ polymorphism in the MDR1 gene changes substrate specificity. Science 315, 525–528 (2007) [1]. Individuals carrying silent SNPs in the MDR1 gene encoding P-glycoprotein sometimes reveal altered P-glycoprotein pharmacokinetics. There is no rational explanation for why silent SNPs might have such effects, especially when no change in P-glycoprotein mRNA and protein expression levels has been observed. The purpose of this study was to perform careful ex vivo (in cells) analysis of the effects of the three polymorphisms (C1236T, G2677T C3435T) on P-glycoprotein expression and activity. As a result, it has been shown that silent polymorphisms (in particular, C3435T) in MDR1 can alter P-glycoprotein conformation and protein activity/substrate specificity. This study is of immense importance as it demonstrates for the first time that naturally occurring silent SNPs can lead to the synthesis of protein product with the same amino acid sequence but different structural and functional properties. Thus, silent SNPs should no longer be neglected in determining the likelihood of development of various diseases, and should be taken into account in personalized drug treatment and development programs.

    Papers of special note have been highlighted as either of interest (•) or of considerable interest (••) to readers.

    Bibliography

    • 1  Kimchi-Sarfaty C, Oh JM, Kim IW et al.: A ‘silent’ polymorphism in the MDR1 gene changes substrate specificity. Science315(5811),525–528 (2007).•• First publication demonstrating that naturally occurring silent SNPs might affect protein folding and activity without changing mRNA and protein levels.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 2  Shastry BS: Pharmacogenetics and the concept of individualized medicine. Pharmacogenomics J.6(1),16–21 (2006).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 3  Daly AK: Individualized drug therapy. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel.10(1),29–36 (2007).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 4  The International HapMap Consortium: A haplotype map of the human genome. Nature437,1299–1320 (2005).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 5  McVean G, Spencer CC, Chaix R: Perspectives on human genetic variation from the HapMap Project. PLoS Genet.1(4),E54 (2005).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 6  Feuk L, Carson AR, Scherer SW: Structural variation in the human genome. Nat. Rev. Genet.7(2),85–97 (2006).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 7  Zhao Z, Fu YX, Hewett-Emmett D, Boerwinkle E: Investigating single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) density in the human genome and its implications for molecular evolution. Gene312,207–213 (2003).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 8  Suh Y, Vijg J: SNP discovery in associating genetic variation with human disease phenotypes. Mutat. Res.573(1–2),41–53 (2005).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 9  Brookes AJ, Prince JA: Genetic association analysis: lessons from the study of Alzheimer’s disease. Mutat. Res.573(1–2),152–159 (2005).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 10  Saxena R, Voight BF, Lyssenko V et al.: Genome-wide association analysis identifies loci for Type 2 diabetes and triglyceride levels. Science (2007) (Epub ahead of print).
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 11  Mead S: Prion disease genetics. Eur. J. Hum. Genet.4(3),273–281 (2006).
      Google Scholar
    • 12  Wang Y, Armstrong SA: Genome-wide SNP analysis in cancer: leukemia shows the way. Cancer Cell11(4),308–309 (2007).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 13  Ambudkar SV, Kimchi-Sarfaty C, Sauna ZE, Gottesman MM: P-glycoprotein: from genomics to mechanism. Oncogene22(47),7468–7485 (2003).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 14  Gottesman MM, Fojo T, Bates SE: Multidrug resistance in cancer: role of ATP-dependent transporters. Nat. Rev. Cancer2(1),48–58 (2002).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 15  Sakaeda T: MDR1 genotype-related pharmacokinetics: fact or fiction? Drug Metab. Pharmacokinet.20(6),391–414 (2005).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 16  Precup J, Ulrich AK, Roopnarine O, Parker J: Context specific misreading of phenylalanine codons. Mol. Gen. Genet.1218(3),397–401 (1989).
      Google Scholar
    • 17  Purvis IJ, Bettany AJ, Santiago TC et al.: The efficiency of folding of some proteins is increased by controlled rates of translation in vivo. A hypothesis. J. Mol. Biol.193(2),413–417 (1987).• First publication putting forward the hypothesis that translation rates might affect protein folding.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 18  Krasheninnikov IA, Komar AA, Adzhubei IA: Role of the rare codon clusters in defining the boundaries of polypeptide chain regions with identical secondary structures in the process of co-translational folding of proteins. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR303(4),995–999 (1988).• Second publication independently suggesting that kinetics of protein translation might affect the cotranslational folding.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 19  Komar AA, Lesnik T, Reiss C: Synonymous codon substitutions affect ribosome traffic and protein folding during in vitro translation. FEBS Lett.462(3),387–391 (1999).• First publication attempting careful experimental verification of the hypothesis using a cell-free protein synthesis system and involving artificial silent mutagenesis.
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 20  Komar AA: SNPs, silent but not invisible. Science315(5811),466–467 (2007).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 21  Kolb VA: Cotranslational protein folding. Mol. Biol. (Mosk.)35(4),682–690 (2001).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 22  Hardesty B, Kramer G: Folding of a nascent peptide on the ribosome. Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol.66,41–66 (2001).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 23  Krasheninnikov IA, Komar AA, Adzhubei IA: Nonuniform size distribution of nascent globin peptides, evidence for pause localization sites, and a contranslational protein-folding model. J. Protein Chem.10(5),445–453 (1991).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 24  Komar AA, Jaenicke R: Kinetics of translation of γB crystallin and its circularly permutated variant in an in vitro cell-free system: possible relations to codon distribution and protein folding. FEBS Lett.376(3),195–198 (1995).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 25  Ikemura T: Codon usage and tRNA content in unicellular and multicellular organisms. Mol. Biol. Evol.2(1),13–34 (1985).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 26  Lavner Y, Kotlar D: Codon bias as a factor in regulating expression via translation rate in the human genome. Gene345(1),127–138 (2005).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 27  Curran JF, Yarus M: Rates of aminoacyl-tRNA selection at 29 sense codons in vivo. J. Mol. Biol.209(1),65–77 (1989).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 28  Sorensen MA, Pedersen S: Absolute in vivo translation rates of individual codons in Escherichia coli. The two glutamic acid codons GAA and GAG are translated with a threefold difference in rate. J. Mol. Biol.222(2),265–280 (1991).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 29  Sharp PM, Tuohy TM, Mosurski KR: Codon usage in yeast: cluster analysis clearly differentiates highly and lowly expressed genes. Nucleic Acids Res.14(13),5125–5143 (1986).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 30  Kim J, Klein PG, Mullet JE: Ribosomes pause at specific sites during synthesis of membrane-bound chloroplast reaction center protein D1. J. Biol. Chem.266(23),14931–14938 (1991).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 31  Kim J, Klein PG, Mullet JE: Synthesis and turnover of photosystem II reaction center protein D1. Ribosome pausing increases during chloroplast development. J. Biol. Chem.269(27),17918–17923 (1994).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 32  Huard FP, Deane CM, Wood GR: Modelling sequential protein folding under kinetic control. Bioinformatics22(14),E203–E210 (2006).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 33  Adzhubei AA, Adzhubei IA, Krasheninnikov IA, Neidle S: Non-random usage of ‘degenerate’ codons is related to protein three-dimensional structure. FEBS Lett.399(1–2),78–82 (1996).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar
    • 34  Kimura M: The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 367 (1984).
      Google Scholar
    • 35  Chamary JV, Parmley JL, Hurst LD: Hearing silence: non-neutral evolution at synonymous sites in mammals. Nat. Rev. Genet.7(2),98–108 (2006).
      Medline CASGoogle Scholar