Talk:Catechol-O-methyltransferase

Cartoon diagram

Would it not be better to replace Cartoon with either Ribbon OR Richardson diagram and a link to the Wiki Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_diagram Not sure how relevant and used Cartoon diagram is. --SteveClement (talk) 19:04, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Irrelevant source

I wonder why [17] ( Robinson S, Goddard L, Dritschel B, Wisley M, Howlin P (2009). "Executive functions in children with autism spectrum disorders". Brain Cogn. 71 (3): 362–368. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2009.06.007. PMC 3481002. PMID 19628325.) is listed as one of the sources supporting the following statement: "The gene variant has been shown to affect cognitive tasks broadly related to executive function, such as set shifting, response inhibition, abstract thought, and the acquisition of rules or task structure." The paper does not seem to mention the COMT gene at all, neither Val158Met polymorphism.

Suggesting to remove the reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.70.46 (talk) 15:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

--Smartial arts (talk) 15:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The Val158Met polymorphism

The first three sentences of this section are unclear and cite contradictory findings. Lachman et al are cited as finding a four-fold difference in overall activity (Met having lower activity). Zhu et al say they find Met overexpression (but agree with Chen et al's finding of an overall 40% decrease in activity). Chen et al say that their 40% difference in activity

:"is much lower than the 2–4-fold differences reported by other groups (Weinshilboum and Raymond 1977; Scanlon et al. 1979; Lotta et al. 1995). Heat pretreatment has been used to test the thermostability of Val and Met in many studies, and the remaining COMT activities after heat pretreatment were then used to calculate the differences between these alleles. Since we did not use heat pretreatment to estimate the COMT activity difference in the DLPFC samples, the 40% difference for prefrontal COMT activity may be more representative of the real difference under normal physiological conditions."  

References

Note that they ascribe the difference to methods (heat treatment) rather than to the effect of differential expression. The "however" in the wiki text "However, the Met variant is overexpressed in the brain,[14] resulting in a 40% decrease" is what confuses me, and I think it should be taken out.

Without delving further, I'd say that it's best to decomplexify, leave out the differential expression, and simply state something like "Protein activity of brain tissue examined in vitro is reduced in the Met allele (anywhere from 40% to four-fold, depending on assay methods)" and cite all three papers.

--Ajasen (talk) 02:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

It is confusing to a lay person... perhaps wording can be simplified to make it more understandable. I'll take a stab at it. --Synthopedia (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

The Met Met polymorphism

a functional single nucleotide polymorphism (a common normal variant) of the gene for catechol-O-methyl transferase, has been shown to affect ratings of subjective well being when 621 women were measured with Experience sample monitoring, which is similar to mood assessment as response to beeping watch the Met Met form confers double the subjective mental sensation of well being from a wide variety of daily events. M Wichers with coauthors The Catechol-O-Methyl Transferase Val158Met Polymorphism and Experience of Reward in the Flow of Daily Life Neuropsychopharmacology (2008) 33, 3030–3036 doi:10.1038/sj.npp.1301520

www.nature.com/npp/journal/v33/n13/full/1301520a.html

note that the Ability to experience reward increased with the number of ‘Met’ alleles This differential effect of genotype was greater for events that were experienced as more pleasant. The effect size of genotypic moderation was quite large: subjects with the Val/Val genotype generated almost similar amounts of PA from a ‘very pleasant event’ as Met/Met subjects did from a ‘bit pleasant event’. Genetic variation with functional impact on cortical dopamine tone has a strong influence on reward experience in the flow of daily life.

Table 1 of the Wichers paper notes that persons with The Met Met phenotype describe events as very pleasant or pleasant with twice the numeric amplitude of those absent the met met genetic polymorphism: Very pleasant 0.437 as compared with .209 p<.001

COMT link

Someone should set a search link for "comt". i had to go through google to get to the Catechol-O-methyl transferase page.

Someone should set a search link for "comt". i had to go through google to get to the Catechol-O-methyl transferase page.

What does it do?

Happened across this article through the "Random article" page...and it makes very little sense. I understand enough biology to recognize the difference between an enzyme and a protein, but it's not immediately apparent what this particular enzyme does in the grand scheme of the organism in which it's part.

There's some mention of neurotransmitters towards the bottom, but that wouldn't lead me to assume that that's what this is.

An enzyme is simply a protein that functions as a catalyst. The name transferase, actually the ending -ase, is an indication this substance is an enzyme. Enzymes are necessary in most biochemical reactions to overcome the energy of activation, which is critical for a reaction to proceed. COMT is an enzyme needed for the biochemical reaction that breaksdown some catecholamines (neurotransmitters) therefore stopping their normal biochemical action.

Frequency of occurence in human population

It would be helpful to add info on frequencies of occurence for this gene, particularly as the connection to mental illness is very topical lately -SM 04:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

References needed

This is a good start, but references are needed for some of the statements 155.198.63.112 14:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Impact of recent student edits

This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:

• 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
• 1 - A few minutes of work needed
• 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
• 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
• 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 20:57, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Reactions to presssure situations

Seems like some of the study information from this http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/magazine/why-can-some-kids-handle-pressure-while-others-fall-apart.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 "Why Can Some Kids Handle Pressure While Others Fall Apart?" should be included in the page. This page appears to give very little low level introductory information. Pbhj (talk) 12:48, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Name

Should the name be "Catechol-O-methyltransferase" or "Catechol O-methyltransferase"? It seems that most research papers favor the version with a hyphen on both sides of the O, whereas most gene/protein databases favor the version with no hyphen preceding the O. Natureium (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@Natureium: You might propose the way you like by making an estimate of which use is more common, and then trying to add weight to the uses where more humans read and write a term versus less weight for publications which machines more commonly read. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@Natureium: , @Bluerasberry: The other naming question is whether there should be a space between the methyl and the transferase. I found this when I was cleaning up Category:Pages with disallowed DISPLAYTITLE modifications.Naraht (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

The methyltransferase version is far more common (>10x on clinicalkey), but I can't determine what is more correct in terms of hyphenation. Natureium (talk) 22:16, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

All references have been marked with "unreliable medical source"?

Why are nearly all references marked with "unreliable medical source"?--Bstard12 (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah it makes no sense given that the claims preceding those sources are not giving medical advice e.g. "The gene variant has been shown to affect cognitive tasks broadly related to executive function, such as set shifting, response inhibition, abstract thought, and the acquisition of rules or task structure" is followed by three sources, all marked as unreliable. 101.98.151.109 (talk) 20:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

All of these "unreliable medical source" reference warnings seem to come from user ShelleyAdams in December 2016 - the first ones were added in this version:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catechol-O-methyltransferase&oldid=752648377

I'm a new editor, so I don't feel comfortable removing them, especially since I'm not knowledgeable about this topic. Since they appear to be erroneous, I strongly suggest that a more experienced editor remove all of them. Language&Life (talk) 00:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Because some people don't like psychiatry. I fixed it. 135.180.194.177 (talk) 05:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I thought. That editor could have just linked to the wiki article expressing those concerns:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_psychiatry

Anyway, thanks for fixing it - I'll be brave and do it myself next time! Language&Life (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)