4.4 Article

Construction of a prediction model for type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Japanese population based on 11 genes with strong evidence of the association

期刊

JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 54, 期 4, 页码 236-241

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jhg.2009.17

关键词

gene-gene interaction; genome-wide association study; prediction model; single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP); type 2 diabetes mellitus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prediction of the disease status is one of the most important objectives of genetic studies. To select the genes with strong evidence of the association with type 2 diabetes mellitus, we validated the associations of the seven candidate loci extracted in our earlier study by genotyping the samples in two independent sample panels. However, except for KCNQ1, the association of none of the remaining seven loci was replicated. We then selected 11 genes, KCNQ1, TCF7L2, CDKAL1, CDKN2A/B, IGF2BP2, SLC30A8, HHEX, GCKR, HNF1B, KCNJ11 and PPARG, whose associations with diabetes have already been reported and replicated either in the literature or in this study in the Japanese population. As no evidence of the gene-gene interaction for any pair of the 11 loci was shown, we constructed a prediction model for the disease using the logistic regression analysis by incorporating the number of the risk alleles for the 11 genes, as well as age, sex and body mass index as independent variables. Cumulative risk assessment showed that the addition of one risk allele resulted in an average increase in the odds for the disease of 1.29 (95% CI=1.25-1.33, P=5.4 x 10(-53)). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, an estimate of the power of the prediction model, was 0.72, thereby indicating that our prediction model for type 2 diabetes may not be so useful but has some value. Incorporation of data from additional risk loci is most likely to increase the predictive power. Journal of Human Genetics (2009) 54, 236-241; doi: 10.1038/jhg.2009.17; published online 27 February 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据