Talk:CYP2C9/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about CYP2C9. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
SJW incuder/inhibitor
hi there, according to my pharmacology textbook st johns wort is a powerful inducer of 2C9 (not inhibitor, as it is listed here). But i was unable to find any web based sources apart from this http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2437900/ 94.113.125.230 (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
According to the following link, mefenamic acid is a substrate for this enzyme: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx500288b?journalCode=crtoec — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.6.57.112 (talk) 09:49, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Merger proposal of CYP2C9*3
I propose to merge CYP2C9*3 into CYP2C9, because the Pharmacogenomics section of CYP2C9 covers the information "CYP2C9*3", in appropriate context and with appropriate references (the only reference of "CYP2C9*3" is already in CYP2C9. Having a separate page does not give any value. @Yunxiang987:@Richhoncho:@UnitedStatesian:@Woohookitty:@Anypodetos:@Dcirovic:@BrownHairedGirl:@Htmlzycq:@Boghog: ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Merger proposal of CYP2C9*13
I wanted to merge CYP2C9*13 into CYP2C9, but there is a WP:REFBOMB in CYP2C9*13, and I don't know how to resolve it. Simply copying all the references would not be a good idea. Please advice. @Yunxiang987:@Richhoncho:@Woohookitty:@Anypodetos:@QuiteUnusual:@BrownHairedGirl:@Htmlzycq:@Rjwilmsi:@Boghog: ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) 17:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- There are a lot of primary sources in CYP2C9*13 that could be replaced by a single review. The bulk of Saikatikorn et al.[1] is not strictly a review, but the introduction does provide what is essentially a review of the subject. Also the CYP2C9*13 article could be condensed into two sentences as follows:
- CYP2C9*13 is polymorphism found in approximately 1% of the Asian population.[1] It is caused by a T269C mutation in the CYP2C9 gene which in turn results in the substitution of leucine at position-90 with proline (L90P). This residue is near the access point for substrates and the L90P mutation causes lower affinity and hence slower metabolism of several drugs that are metabolized CYP2C9 by such as diclofenac and flurbiprofen.[1]
- Done I was bold and redirected CYP2C9*13 to CYP2C9 and also added the above paragraph to CYP2C9. Boghog (talk) 18:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b c Saikatikorn Y, Lertkiatmongkol P, Assawamakin A, Ruengjitchatchawalya M, Tongsima S (November 2010). "Study of the Structural Pathology Caused by CYP2C9 Polymorphisms towards Flurbiprofen Metabolism Using Molecular Dynamics Simulation.". In Chan JH, Ong YS, Cho SB (eds.). International Conference on Computational Systems-Biology and Bioinformatics. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 26–35. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16750-8_3. ISBN 978-3-642-16749-2.
- @Boghog: Thank you! I have re-arranged the order of variant alleles and added some more information on *13. It is not a very important variant. The evidence level of this variant is very limited even in 2020, comparing to other variants. That's why it is not included in the Tier 1 panel of alleles for testing assays. I don't know why there was an entire page at Wikipedia for *13 if it was a variant of minor significance and minor evidence, comparing to Tier 1 variants (CYP2C9 *2, *3, *5, *6, *8, and *11). ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for further expanding the article. I trimmed back discussion of the PharVar Database, so the focus remains on CYP2C9 and not the database. I also created a stub on Pharmacogene Variation Consortium and included a link from CYP2C9 to this new stub. Boghog (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Boghog: That is a great idea to make a new section for PharmVar. I think we should keep a small sentence on the origin of these star-labels. So it should be easier to understand even for first-time visitors. For some genes, the most common way to describe variants is by cDNA, for other - by rsIDS, but for pharmacologically-relevant CYPs, stars are the most common way. That's why we should dedicate a few words on this. You were right that it was too long. I have tried to make a shorter yet easier to understand explanation. Please review https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CYP2C9&type=revision&diff=984182492&oldid=984178406 ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for further expanding the article. I trimmed back discussion of the PharVar Database, so the focus remains on CYP2C9 and not the database. I also created a stub on Pharmacogene Variation Consortium and included a link from CYP2C9 to this new stub. Boghog (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Boghog: Thank you! I have re-arranged the order of variant alleles and added some more information on *13. It is not a very important variant. The evidence level of this variant is very limited even in 2020, comparing to other variants. That's why it is not included in the Tier 1 panel of alleles for testing assays. I don't know why there was an entire page at Wikipedia for *13 if it was a variant of minor significance and minor evidence, comparing to Tier 1 variants (CYP2C9 *2, *3, *5, *6, *8, and *11). ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)