| Literature DB >> 17150099 |
Michele Pinelli1, Manuela Giacchetti, Fabio Acquaviva, Sergio Cocozza, Giovanna Donnarumma, Emanuela Lapice, Gabriele Riccardi, Geremia Romano, Olga Vaccaro, Antonella Monticelli.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is widely accepted that Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) and other complex diseases are the product of complex interplay between genetic susceptibility and environmental causes. To cope with such a complexity, all the statistical and conceptual strategies available should be used. The working hypothesis of this study was that two well-known T2DM risk factors could have diverse effect in individuals carrying different genotypes. In particular, our effort was to investigate if a well-defined group of genes, involved in peripheral energy expenditure, could modify the impact of two environmental factors like age and obesity on the risk to develop diabetes. To achieve this aim we exploited a multianalytical approach also using dimensionality reduction strategy and conservative significance correction strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17150099 PMCID: PMC1712228 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2350-7-85
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Genet ISSN: 1471-2350 Impact factor: 2.103
Clinical and metabolic features of study participants
| 342 | 305 | ||
| a 31.57 (6.06) | 27.25 (4.58) | ||
| a 58 (8.34) | 54 (6.60) | ||
| a 75% | 56% | ||
| 209 (45.11) | 206 (38.13) | ||
| a 159 (108.63) | 135 (73.54) | ||
| 48 (12.89) | 50 (13.68) | ||
| 130 (39.48) | 130 (35.82) | ||
| b 42% | 59% | ||
| M (SD) | M (SD) | ||
a: t-test p < 0.001; b: χ2 p < 0.001
Genotype frequencies of the diabetic patients and controls
| Controls (305) | Diabetic patients (342) | Controls (228) | Diabetic patients (162) | Controls (77) | Diabetic patients (180) | ||||||||
| 34 | 30 | 22 | 15 | 12 | 15 | ||||||||
| 124 | 145 | 95 | 70 | 29 | 75 | ||||||||
| 147 | 167 | 111 | 77 | 36 | 90 | ||||||||
| 224 | 240 | 165 | 106 | 59 | 134 | ||||||||
| 78 | 94 | 61 | 49 | 17 | 45 | ||||||||
| 3 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| 139 | 167 | 100 | 81 | 39 | 86 | ||||||||
| 134 | 136 | 103 | 63 | 31 | 73 | ||||||||
| 32 | 39 | 25 | 18 | 7 | 21 | ||||||||
| 49 | 68 | 35 | 28 | 14 | 40 | ||||||||
| 126 | 149 | 92 | 71 | 34 | 78 | ||||||||
| 130 | 124 | 101 | 63 | 29 | 61 | ||||||||
| 135 | 172 | 99 | 72 | 36 | 100 | ||||||||
| 124 | 138 | 98 | 71 | 26 | 67 | ||||||||
| 46 | 31 | 31 | 19 | 15 | 12 | ||||||||
MDR Analyses
| 10 | 33.1 % | < 0.001 | ||
| - | - | n. s. |
Sample: sample of the analysis. Best Model: number of factors and which factors best predict the disease status in sample. Cross Validation: value of the consistency of the model across the 10 repeated test. Prediction Error: percent of subjects incorrectly classified following the proposed model. : significant level calculated through a 1000-fold permutation method.
Figure 1Percent of T2DM patients for each genotype (. On the x-axis the three main age ranges are indicated. The bars indicate the frequencies of non-obese subjects that develop diabetes according to their age range and genotype. Black bars included all the UCP3 T and ARDB2-16 Arg carriers. White bars represent the double homozygote UCP3 CC/ARDB2-16 GlyGly. UCP3 T/ARDB2-16 Arg carriers individuals show an age-related increased frequency of diabetic disease, while double-homozygotes do not. Number of diabetic patients and number of total subjects, divided by a slash, are at the bottom of the bar of each class.