Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Dental Research
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vieira, A.R.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein-McHenry, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vieira, A.R.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein-McHenry, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

RAPID COMMUNICATION

Genome-wide Scan Finds Suggestive Caries Loci

A.R. Vieira1,2,3,4,*, M.L. Marazita1,3,4,5 and T. Goldstein-McHenry1,3

1 Departments of Oral Biology,
2 Pediatric Dentistry, and
3 Center for Craniofacial and Dental Genetics, 614 Salk Hall, University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine, 3501 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA;
4 Department of Human Genetics, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh; and
5 Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh

Correspondence: * corresponding author, arv11{at}pitt.edu


    ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Here we report the first genome-wide scan performed for caries. Evidence from twin studies suggests a genetic component to caries. We aimed to identify genetic factors contributing to caries in a population similarly influenced by confounding factors, such as diet, oral hygiene habits, fluoride exposure, and access to dental care. Forty-six families with similar cultural and behavioral habits, and living in the Philippines, were studied, and genome-wide genotype data and DMFT (Decayed, Missing due to caries, Filled Teeth) scores were evaluated. Suggestive loci logarithmic odds (LOD) scores above 2.0 or non-parametric p-values below 0.0009) were found for low caries susceptibility (5q13.3, 14q11.2, and Xq27.1) and high caries susceptibility (13q31.1 and 14q24.3). Genes that may be related to saliva flow and diet preferences are proposed as possible candidates. A protective locus for caries in the X chromosome may explain the gender differences seen in caries frequency.

Key Words: caries • genetics • linkage


    INTRODUCTION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Caries is a major public health concern worldwide, affecting more than 80% of the population alive in the world today. Its impact on individuals and communities—as a result of pain and suffering, impairment of function, and reduced quality of life—is considerable (World Health Organization, 2003). Moreover, traditional treatment of caries is extremely costly, representing the fourth most expensive disease to treat in most of the industrialized world. Access to appropriate treatment is difficult in many low-income countries; if treatment were available in such countries, the costs of caries alone in children would exceed the total current health care budgets for children (Yee and Sheiham, 2002).

Although caries is largely preventable, it remains the most common chronic disease for children ages 5 to 17 yrs in the US, as well as in the rest of the world (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2005). In the US, caries is 5 times more common than asthma (59% vs. 11%). Caries is an infectious localized disease that results in loss of mineral from the affected teeth, caused by organic acids that originate from the microbial fermentation of carbohydrates.

Caries is related to 3 essential interactive factors: the host, represented by teeth and saliva; the oral microbial flora; and type of diet (Keyes, 1960, 1962). The factors related to the host are under strong genetic control, but external factors—such as fluoride exposure, quality of dental hygiene, microbiota, and type of diet—may overcome an individual’s a priori genetic susceptibility. Therefore, hereditary aspects of caries have been seldom studied and thus are poorly understood. Further complicating family studies of caries are shared behavior, practices, and habits within families. These factors can be expected to contribute to covariance between relatives, and to mimic genetic correlation if not controlled by the experimental design (Potter, 1990). This is particularly true for caries, which can be profoundly affected by dietary sugar intake and/or oral hygiene practices within families.

Studies of twins (Boraas et al., 1988; Conry et al., 1993), families (Klein and Palmer, 1940; Klein, 1946), and animal models (Hunt et al., 1944) have all indicated that caries has a genetic component. Some of the most compelling evidence for a genetic component to caries comes from studies of twins reared apart. In two related studies, investigators found significant resemblance within monozygotic, but not dizygotic, twin pairs reared apart for percentage of teeth and surfaces restored or carious (Boraas et al., 1988; Conry et al., 1993), and estimated the genetic contribution to caries to be 40% (Conry et al., 1993). Other recent studies of twins reared together estimated the heritability for caries, adjusted for age and gender, as ranging from 45 to 64% (Bretz et al., 2005). Despite the strong evidence for a genetic component in caries, conclusions have usually not gone beyond the observation of familial aggregation.

Animal models have provided the first interesting connections between loci and caries susceptibility. The HLA-DR antigen, which corresponds to the human major histocompatibility complex (MHC), has been associated with helper T-cell activity in the control of dental caries (Lehner et al., 1981). However, this finding was not replicated in a second independent study (de Vries et al., 1985). Much later, the H-2 region on chromosome 17 was linked to susceptibility to caries in mice (Suzuki et al., 1998). Chromosome 2 was also reported as linked to susceptibility to caries in mice (Uematsu et al., 2003). A genome-wide scan performed in genetic crosses of C3H/HeJ (caries-resistant) and C57BL/6J (caries-susceptible) mice inoculated with Streptococcus mutans serotype c detected 3 suggestive quantitative trait loci (QTL) on chromosomes 1, 2, and 7, one significant QTL on chromosome 2, and one highly significant QTL on chromosome 8 (Nariyama et al., 2004).

Only recently has a genetics study in human caries been reported. Tuftelin genotypes appeared to interact with levels of Streptococcus mutans infection in children with early childhood caries (with 4 or more affected tooth surfaces) compared with caries-free children (Slayton et al., 2005).

In the current study, we compared individuals living in the same area in the Philippines, and therefore with similar cultural backgrounds and access to dental care, in an attempt to reduce the influence of environmental confounders. The families studied all come from the central part of the country, mostly Cebu Island, and the surrounding islands. All families are small-scale fishermen or landless rural dwellers. They all appear to be descendents from a proto-Malay stock. Caries was measured by the caries experience score DMFT (Decayed, Missing due to caries, Filled Teeth) (Klein et al., 1938). Here we report the first genome-wide search performed to identify caries susceptibility and protective loci in humans.


    MATERIALS & METHODS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The study sample consisted of 46 families with genome scan genotypes available from our previous work with oral clefts (Riley et al., 2007). The genotyping was done in the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) for 392 markers from the Marshfield Genetics screening set 8. These families are part of a project where complete dental descriptions were obtained in an attempt to correlate dental characteristics with oral clefts. This protocol has both the University of Pittsburgh and local Filipino IRB approval. Appropriate informed consent was obtained from all participants. The DMFT cut-offs are modified from the descriptions used by the WHO (World Health Organization, 2003), to allow for the creation of more discrete age groups and risk classifications (Table 1Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 1. Definition of Caries Experience Level Based on Age and DMFT (Decayed, Missing due to caries, Filled Teeth) Scores
 
We first accessed each genome scan marker with PedCheck (O’Connell and Weeks, 1998), to test for inconsistencies due to non-paternity or other errors. For the parametric linkage analyses, we estimated allele frequencies for unaffected founders from a panel of 458 Filipino cleft families with available genotypes. The genetic model parameters were taken from segregation analysis results in a sample of the Filipino families (unpublished results). The dominant model was a disease allele frequency of 0.002 with a penetrance of 0.60. The recessive model was a disease allele frequency of 0.04 with a penetrance of 0.90.

We calculated two-point LOD scores in the families using the LINKAGE program with updates to speed calculations (VITESSE and FASTLINK) (Cottingham et al., 1993; Terwilliger and Ott, 1994; O’Connell and Weeks, 1995). For multipoint LOD and heterogeneity LOD (HLOD) (Smith, 1963) calculations, we used the descent graph method (Sobel and Lange, 1996; Sobel et al., 1996; Lange, 2002) implemented in the computer program SIMWALK2. Given the probable complexities in the genetic model for caries (e.g., heterogeneity), we also calculated model-free linkage statistics (both two-point and multipoint), using MERLIN (Abecasis et al., 2002).


    RESULTS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The 46 families have 624 people recorded in the pedigrees. DMFT data were available for 279 people. We performed 2 genome scan analyses. In the first pass, individuals classified with very low and low caries experiences were assigned as ‘affected’. In the second pass, individuals classified with moderate-to-high caries experiences were assigned as ‘affected’. Three regions yielded suggestive positive results (LOD scores above 2.0 and or non-parametric LOD p-values below 0.0009) for low caries susceptibility: 5q13.3 (dominant multipoint LOD score = 2.30), 14q11.2 (recessive single-point LOD score = 2.29), and Xq27.1 (non-parametric LOD p-value = 0.00005). Another 2 regions yielded suggestive positive results for high caries susceptibility: 13q31.1 (recessive single-point LOD score = 2.33 and recessive multipoint LOD score = 2.20) and 14q24.3 (recessive single-point LOD score = 2.06). Several other regions yielded LOD scores above 1.0 or non-parametric LOD p-values below 0.05 (Table 2Go and Figs. 1Go, 2Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 2. Single-point Parametric Dominant and Recessive Linkage Results Summary of the Two Genome-wide Scans for Low Caries Susceptibility Loci (DMFT* categories 1 and 2, assigned as ‘affected’) and High Caries Susceptibility Loci (DMFT categories 3 and 4, assigned as ‘affected’) in 46 Families
 

Figure 1
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 1. Multipoint parametric dominant and recessive linkage results summary of the two genome-wide scans for low caries susceptibility loci (DMFT categories 1 and 2, assigned as ‘affected’) and high caries susceptibility loci (DMFT categories 3 and 4, assigned as ‘affected’) in 46 families. Bars indicate the most significant LOD score results in each chromosome. In addition to chromosomes 5 and 13 that showed LOD scores above 2.0, several chromosomes (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18, and 19) showed LOD scores above 1.0. DMFT = Decayed, Missing due to caries, Filled Teeth; low DOM = multipoint parametric linkage analysis with a dominant model in low caries susceptibility; low REC = multipoint parametric linkage analysis with a recessive model in low caries susceptibility; high DOM = multipoint parametric linkage analysis with a dominant model in high caries susceptibility; high REC = multipoint parametric linkage analysis with a recessive model in high caries susceptibility.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 2. Non-parametric linkage results summary (presented as negative logs of the p-values) of the 2 genome-wide scans for low caries susceptibility loci (DMFT categories 1 and 2, assigned as ‘affected’) and high caries susceptibility loci (DMFT categories 3 and 4, assigned as ‘affected’) in 46 families. Bars indicate the –log linear of the most significant p values in each chromosome. In addition to chromosome X (p = 0.00005), chromosomes 5 (p = 0.001), 6 (p = 0.009), 13 (p = 0.006), and 22 (p = 0.004) presented interesting results. DMFT = Decayed, Missing due to caries, Filled Teeth; single low = single-point linkage analysis in low caries susceptibility; multi low = multipoint linkage analysis in low caries susceptibility; single high = single-point linkage analysis in high caries susceptibility; multi high = multipoint linkage analysis in high caries susceptibility.

 

    DISCUSSION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Among the 5 regions with the most significant linkage results, only 1 overlaps with the regions mapped by the genome-wide scan performed in genetic crosses of C3H/HeJ (caries-resistant) and C57BL/6J (caries-susceptible) mice inoculated with Streptococcus mutans serotype c (Nariyama et al., 2004). Human 14q11.2 corresponds to the region at 45.5cM at mouse chromosome 8, which yielded the most significant QTL results in the mouse genome-wide scan. The C57BL/6J allele for the QTL was associated with caries-resistant properties, while the C3H/HeJ allele was associated with caries susceptibility. About 1100 genes map on the mouse chromosome 8 in which the QTL were detected, including genes for which functions are known and unknown. The only possible candidate gene highlighted by Nariyama et al.(2004) on the mouse genome-wide scan that maps to human 14q11.2 is NFATC4 (nuclear factor of activated T-cells, cytoplasmic, calcineurin-dependent 4). According to the authors, this gene is involved in intra- and extracellular transport of calcium and potassium ions relating to the flow rate of saliva.

Chromosome 1q21.3, where tuftelin is located, did not yield any suggestive linkage results. The previous report that suggested tuftelin involvement in caries (Slayton et al., 2005) showed significant regression analysis data, suggesting the existence of an interaction between tuftelin genotypes and infection by Streptococcus mutans. In our study, we did not have microbiologic data available, and this possible interaction could not be investigated.

Candidate genes for caries could range from genes contributing to enamel formation to those for saliva composition and immune responses. There are no obvious candidate genes in the 5 regions with the most significant results. The marker that yielded the suggestive LOD score in 14q11.2 (D14S742) is very close to OR4E2 (olfactory receptor, family 4, subfamily E, member 2), which interacts with odorant molecules in the nose, to initiate a neuronal response that triggers the perception of a smell. Taste and smell are subsumed under the term ‘flavor’. Many flavors are recognized mainly through the sense of smell (e.g., anyone will have trouble identifying the chocolate flavor if one holds one’s nose while eating chocolate, even though one can distinguish the food’s sweetness or bitterness). Genetic variation in genes regulating olfactory and taste sensations may predispose someone to be more or less inclined to eat certain foods, and therefore to have a less or more cariogenic diet.

The other 2 regions with the most significant results for lower caries experience are 5q13.3 and Xq27.1. CARTPT (cocaine- and amphetamine-regulated transcript) is located in between the markers that yielded suggestive LOD scores in 5q13.3 (D5S2500 and D5S424). This gene appears to have a role in reward, feeding, and stress, and it has the functional properties of an endogenous psycho-stimulant (Kuhar et al., 2002). A behavior that includes decreased ingestion of sweet foods would contribute to a lower caries experience.

A protective locus for caries in the human X chromosome raises interesting possibilities. There is a nearly universal pattern of sex differences in caries. An extensive literature review of more than 50 epidemiological and clinical reports and 50 paleopathological studies of caries demonstrated a clear female gender bias in caries prevalence (Lukacs and Largaespada, 2006). Higher caries prevalence among females is often explained by one of 3 factors: (1) early eruption of teeth in girls, and longer exposure to a cariogenic oral environment; (2) proximity of women to food supplies and snacking during food preparation; and (3) pregnancy and hormonal influences. The evidence of a contribution of a locus in the X chromosome to low caries susceptibility may shed some light on the poorly understood gender differences in caries prevalence. In our data, the group of fathers of the studied families had a lower average DMFT score (10.96), compared with that in the mothers (14.45). Therefore, X-linked genetic variation could partly explain why men tend to have fewer cavities than women.

The 2 regions with the most significant results for the ‘higher caries experience’ scan were 13q31.1 and 14q24.3. The marker that yielded the most significant LOD score in 13q31.1 (D13S317) is near SPRY2 (Sprouty2). Sprouty2 has been shown to inhibit the Ras/MAP kinase pathway (Yusoff et al., 2002). The MAP kinase cascades constitute highly conserved signaling systems that have been deemed to play various roles in physiological responses, including immune responses. In addition, SPRY2 is an antagonist of FGF signaling, which is implicated in controlling the integrity of oral mucosa and as having mitogenic effects in the salivary glands as well (Kagami et al., 2000).

The other region, 14q24.3, had a marker (D14S53) close to ESRRB (estrogen-related receptor beta). This gene encodes a protein with similarity to the estrogen receptor. Its function is unknown; however, this gene is likely to have diverse biological functions (Zhou et al., 2006). One can argue that a gene with estrogen-related function could also contribute to the observed gender differences in caries frequency. Estrogens have been known to have a depressing effect on the secretion of growth hormone from the anterior pituitary. Growth hormone is known to be closely related to the development and maintenance of normal histologic structure of salivary glands, the function of which, in turn, might influence caries formation (Liu, 1967).

This is the first time a genome-wide search has been performed for caries in humans, and the investigation of these chromosomal regions can unveil genes that contribute to caries susceptibility and provide a new framework for caries prevention strategies. If future studies can identify predisposing and/or protective genetic factors, we will potentially be able to design more effective treatments aimed at preventing dental caries in children worldwide.


    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
The authors are indebted to the families who participated in this project. We are thankful to Jeffrey C. Murray for many helpful discussions. Sandra Daack-Hirsch provided family and genotyping information. Phenomics Group of the Philippines, Inc. provided technical support. Support was provided by NIH Grant R21-DE16718 and R01-DE14899. Genotyping services were provided by the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). The CIDR is fully funded through a Federal contract from the National Institutes of Health to The Johns Hopkins University (contract number N01-HG-65403).

Received for publication August 14, 2007. Revision received February 5, 2008. Accepted for publication February 26, 2008.


    REFERENCES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS & METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  • Abecasis GR, Cherny SS, Cookson WO, Cardon LR (2002). Merlin—Rapid analysis of dense genetic maps using sparse gene flow trees. Nat Genet 30:97–101.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Boraas JC, Messer LB, Till MJ (1988). A genetic contribution to dental caries, occlusion, and morphology as demonstrated by twins reared apart. J Dent Res 67:1150–1155.
  • Bretz WA, Corby PM, Schork NJ, Robinson MT, Coelho M, Costa S, et al. (2005). Longitudinal analysis of heritability for dental caries traits. J Dent Res 84:1047–1051.
  • Conry JP, Messer LB, Boraas JC, Aeppli DP, Bouchard TJ Jr (1993). Dental caries and treatment characteristics in human twins reared apart. Arch Oral Biol 38:937–943.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Cottingham RW Jr, Idury RM, Schäffer AA (1993). Faster sequential genetic linkage computations. Am J Hum Genet 53:252–263.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • de Vries RR, Zeylemaker P, van Palenstein Helderman WH, Huis in’t Veld JH (1985). Lack of association between HLA-DR antigens and dental caries. Tissue Antigens 25:173–174.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hunt HR, Hoppert CA, Erwin WG (1944). Inheritance of susceptibility to caries in albino rats (Mus norvegicus). J Dent Res 23:385–401.
  • Kagami H, Hiramatsu Y, Hishida S, Okazaki Y, Horie K, Oda Y. et al. (2000). Salivary growth factors in health and disease. Adv Dent Res 14:99–102.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Keyes PH (1960). The infectious and transmissible nature of experimental dental caries. Findings and implications. Arch Oral Biol 13:304–320.
  • Keyes PH (1962). Recent advances in dental caries research. Int Dent J 12:443–463.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Klein H (1946). The family and dental disease. IV. Dental disease (DMF) experiences in parents and offspring. J Am Dent Assoc 33:735–743.
  • Klein H, Palmer CE (1940). Dental caries in brothers and sisters of immune and susceptible children. Milbank Mem Fund Q 18:67–82.
  • Klein H, Palmer CE, Knutson JW (1938). Studies on dental caries: I. Dental status and dental needs of elementary school children. Public Health Rep 53:751–765.
  • Kuhar MJ, Adams S, Dominguez G, Jaworski J, Balkan B (2002). CART peptides. Neuropeptides 36:1–8.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Lange K (2002). Mathematical and statistical methods for genetic analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  • Lehner T, Lamb JR, Welsh KL, Batchelor RJ (1981). Association between HLA-DR antigens and helper cell activity in the control of dental caries. Nature 292:770–772.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Liu FTY (1967). Effect of estrogen, thyroxin, and their combination on dental caries and salivary glands in ovariectomized and intact female rats. J Dent Res 46:471–477.
  • Lukacs JR, Largaespada LL (2006). Explaining sex differences in dental caries prevalence: saliva, hormones, and "life-history" etiologies. Am J Hum Biol 18:540–555.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Nariyama M, Shimizu K, Uematsu T, Maeda T (2004). Identification of chromosomes associated with dental caries susceptibility using quantitative trait locus analysis in mice. Caries Res 38:79–84.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • O’Connell JR, Weeks DE (1995). The VITESSE algorithm for rapid exact multilocus linkage analysis via genotype set-recording and fuzzy inheritance. Nat Genet 11:402–408.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • O’Connell JR, Weeks DE (1998). PedCheck: a program for identification of genotype incompatibilities in linkage analysis. Am J Hum Genet 63:259–266.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Potter RH (1990). Twin half-sibs: a research design for genetic epidemiology of common dental disorders. J Dent Res 69:1527–1530.
  • Riley BM, Schultz RE, Cooper ME, Goldstein-McHenry T, Daack-Hirsch S, Lee KT, et al. (2007). A genome-wide linkage scan for cleft lip and cleft palate identifies a novel locus on 8p11–23. Am J Med Genet A 143:846–852.
  • Slayton RL, Cooper ME, Marazita ML (2005). Tuftelin, mutans streptococci, and dental caries susceptibility. J Dent Res 84:711–714.
  • Smith CA (1963). Testing for heterogeneity of recombination fraction values in human genetics. Ann Hum Genet 27:175–182.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Sobel E, Lange K (1996). Descent graphs in pedigree analysis: applications to haplotyping, location scores, and marker-sharing statistics. Am J Hum Genet 58:1323–1337.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Sobel E, Lange K, O’Connell JR, Weeks DE (1996). Haplotyping algorithms. In: Genetic mapping and DNA sequencing. Speed TP, Waterman MS, editors. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 89–110.
  • Suzuki N, Kurihara Y, Kurihara Y (1998). Dental caries susceptibility in mice is closely linked to the H-2 region on chromosome 17. Caries Res 32:262–265.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Terwilliger JD, Ott J (1994). Handbook of human genetic linkage. 1st ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Uematsu T, Nariyama M, Shimizu K, Maeda T (2003). Mapping of affected gene(s) to dental caries susceptibility on mouse chromosome 2. Pediatr Dent J 13:75–81.
  • US Department of Health and Human Services (2005). Preventing dental caries. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/factsheets/prevention/oh.htm
  • World Health Organization (2003). The world oral health report 2003. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Yee R, Sheiham A (2002). The burden of restorative dental treatment for children in third world countries. Int Dent J 52:1–9.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Yusoff P, Lao DH, Ong SH, Wong ESM, Lim J, Lo TL, et al. (2002). Sprouty2 inhibits the Ras/MAP kinase pathway by inhibiting the activation of Raf. J Biol Chem 277:3195–3201.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Zhou W, Liu Z, Wu J, Liu JH, Hyder SM, Antoniou E, et al. (2006). Identification and characterization of two novel splicing isoforms of human-estrogen related receptor beta. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91:569–579.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 87, No. 5, 435-439 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/154405910808700506


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vieira, A.R.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein-McHenry, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vieira, A.R.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein-McHenry, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?