Genetic Risk Reclassification for Type 2 Diabetes by Age Below or Above 50 Years Using 40 Type 2 Diabetes Risk Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms

OBJECTIVE: To test if knowledge of type 2 diabetes genetic variants improves disease prediction. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We tested 40 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with diabetes in 3,471 Framingham Offspring Study subjects followed over 34 years using pooled logistic regress...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inDiabetes care Vol. 34; no. 1; pp. 121 - 125
Main Authors de Miguel-Yanes, Jose M, Shrader, Peter, Pencina, Michael J, Fox, Caroline S, Manning, Alisa K, Grant, Richard W, Dupuis, Josèe, Florez, Jose C, D'Agostino, Ralph B. Sr, Cupples, L. Adrienne, Meigs, James B
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Alexandria, VA American Diabetes Association 01.01.2011
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0149-5992
1935-5548
1935-5548
DOI10.2337/dc10-1265

Cover

More Information
Summary:OBJECTIVE: To test if knowledge of type 2 diabetes genetic variants improves disease prediction. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We tested 40 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with diabetes in 3,471 Framingham Offspring Study subjects followed over 34 years using pooled logistic regression models stratified by age (<50 years, diabetes cases = 144; or ≥50 years, diabetes cases = 302). Models included clinical risk factors and a 40-SNP weighted genetic risk score. RESULTS: In people <50 years of age, the clinical risk factors model C-statistic was 0.908; the 40-SNP score increased it to 0.911 (P = 0.3; net reclassification improvement (NRI): 10.2%, P = 0.001). In people ≥50 years of age, the C-statistics without and with the score were 0.883 and 0.884 (P = 0.2; NRI: 0.4%). The risk per risk allele was higher in people <50 than ≥50 years of age (24 vs. 11%; P value for age interaction = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of common genetic variation appropriately reclassifies younger people for type 2 diabetes risk beyond clinical risk factors but not older people.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
MAGIC and DIAGRAM+ Investigators are listed in supplementary Table A5 in the online appendix available at http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/dc10-1265/DC1.
ISSN:0149-5992
1935-5548
1935-5548
DOI:10.2337/dc10-1265