| Literature DB >> 24843776 |
Simin Zhang1, Jianzhong Xiao2, Qian Ren1, Xueyao Han1, Yong Tang1, Wenying Yang2, Xianghai Zhou1, Linong Ji1.
Abstract
A genome-wide association study in the Chinese Han population has identified several novel genetic variants of the serine racemase (SRR) gene in type 2 diabetes. Our purpose was to systematically evaluate the contribution of SRR variants in the Chinese Han population. rs391300 and rs4523957 in SRR were genotyped respectively in the two independent populations. A meta-analysis was used to estimate the effects of SRR in 21,305 Chinese Han individuals. Associations between single-nucleotide polymorphisms and diabetes-related phenotypes were analyzed among 2,615 newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients and 5,029 controls. Neither rs391300 nor rs4523957 were associated with type 2 diabetes in populations. Furthermore, meta-analysis did not confirm an association between type 2 diabetes and SRR. In the controls, rs391300-A and rs4523957-G were associated with higher 30-min plasma glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test. The present study did not confirm that SRR was associated with type 2 diabetes.Entities:
Keywords: Serine racemase gene; Single‐nucleotide polymorphisms; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Year: 2013 PMID: 24843776 PMCID: PMC4020332 DOI: 10.1111/jdi.12145
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Investig ISSN: 2040-1116 Impact factor: 4.232
Single‐nucleotide polymorphism association with type 2 diabetes in population 1 from Beijing
| SNP | Genotyping (AA/Aa/aa) | OR (95% CI) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | Control | |||
| rs391300 | 121/107/21 | 258/217/49 | 0.92 (0.71 –1.20) | 0.54 |
| rs4523957 | 100/78/19 | 219/141/27 | 1.11 (0.81 –1.51) | 0.52 |
A, the major allele; a, the minor allele; SNP, single‐nucleotide polymorphism.
P‐values are adjusted for age, sex and body mass index.
Single‐nucleotide polymorphism association with type 2 diabetes in the China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Study by logistic regression analysis
| SNP | Case | Control | ADD | REC | DOM | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA | Aa | aa | MAF | AA | Aa | aa | MAF | OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| |
| rs391300 | 2063 | 1754 | 347 | 0.29 | 2284 | 1840 | 354 | 0.29 | 0.98 (0.91 –1.06) | 0.74 | 1.04 (0.87 –1.25) | 0.63 | 0.96 (0.87 –1.06) | 0.49 |
| rs4523957 | 2156 | 1846 | 338 | 0.29 | 2384 | 1963 | 373 | 0.29 | 0.99 (0.92 –1.07) | 0.93 | 1.04 (0.87 –1.25) | 0.62 | 0.98 (0.89 –1.08) | 0.70 |
A, major allele; a, minor allele; ADD, genotypic additive; CI, confidence interval; DOM, genotypic dominant; MAF, minor allele frequency; OR, odds ratio; REC, genotypic recessive.
Adjusted for age, sex and body mass index.
Meta‐analysis of serine racemase rs391300 among Chinese Han populations
| Author | Year |
| A allele frequency | OR | 95% CI | Weight (%) | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | Control | Case | Control | ||||||
| Zhang | Current study | 249 | 524 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.998 | 0.791 –1.260 | 12.09 | |
| Zhang | Current study | 4651 | 5029 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 1.014 | 0.953 –1.080 | 20.02 | |
| Li | 2012 | 798 | 659 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 1.000 | 0.848 –1.178 | 19.31 |
|
| Cui | 2011 | 698 | 803 | 0.28 | 0.29 | 0.977 | 0.833 –1.145 | 15.39 |
|
| Shu | 2010 | 1019 | 1710 | 0.29 | 0.28 | 1.047 | 0.927 –1.182 | 15.66 |
|
| Tsai | 2010 | 2798 | 2367 | 0.31 | 0.37 | 0.765 | 0.705 –1.830 | 17.54 |
|
| Pooled OR | 0.956 | 0.845 –1.082 | 100 | ||||||
There was an extreme heterogeneity (P = 0.0008, I2 = 85.4%) for meta‐analysis for six studies. The odds ratio (OR) was calculated in a random model. CI, confidence interval.
Association between quantitative phenotypes and single‐nucleotide polymorphisms in a normal glucose tolerant population
| rs4523957 |
| rs391300 |
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GG | GT | TT | β | AA | AG | GG | β | |||
| v338 (96/242) | 1846 (594/1252) | 2156 (715/1441) | 347 (101/246) | 1754 (569/1185) | 2063 (677/1386) | |||||
| Age | 50.4 ± 8.2 | 50.8 ± 8.3 | 50.6 ± 8.5 | 0.64 | 50.6 ± 8.3 | 50.8 ± 8.2 | 50.5 ± 8.3 | 0.68 | ||
| BMI | 22.97 ± 2.42 | 23.03 ± 2.42 | 23.06 ± 2.45 | −0.04 | 0.49 | 22.97 ± 2.45 | 23.03 ± 2.42 | 23.06 ± 2.45 | −0.04 | 0.46 |
| FPG | 5.04 ± 0.49 | 5.02 ± 0.53 | 5.00 ± 0.51 | 0.02 | 0.12 | 5.04 ± 0.49 | 5.01 ± 0.53 | 5.00 ± 0.51 | 0.02 | 0.13 |
| 30 m‐PG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2hPG | 5.73 ± 1.17 | 5.71 ± 1.10 | 5.72 ± 1.09 | −0.01 | 0.69 | 5.78 ± 1.15 | 5.69 ± 1.10 | 5.72 ± 1.10 | 0.003 | 0.92 |
| Fins | 6.33 (4.85 – 8.59) | 6.40 (5.00 –8.54) | 6.38 (5.00 –8.40) | −0.003 | 0.78 | 6.33 (4.87 –8.38) | 6.40 (5.00 –8.57) | 6.46 (5.00 –8.45) | −0.01 | 0.55 |
| 30 min‐Ins | 32.9 (20.82 –55) | 34.16 (22.61 –53.11) | 33.34 (21.81 –52.07) | 0.01 | 0.44 | 33.14 (22.02 –52.79) | 34.44 (23.19 –53.32) | 33.57 (22.02 –52.79) | 0.02 | 0.30 |
| 2 h‐Ins | 22.85 (13.88 –34.01) | 22.53 (14.2 –34.78) | 22.22 (14.65 –34.57) | 0.004 | 0.80 | 23.45 (14.28 –34.69) | 22.65 (14.33 –35.22) | 22.09 (14.52 –34.47) | 0.02 | 0.19 |
| HOMA‐B | 84.78 (62.29 –120.18) | 86.22 (61.56 –125.21) | 85.55 (62.87 –123.39) | −0.01 | 0.48 | 82.21 (61.81 –120.37) | 87.17 (62.15 –124.12) | 85.58 (62.88 –124.62) | −0.02 | 0.24 |
| HOMA‐IR | 1.41 (1.07 –1.96) | 1.44 (1.11 –1.92) | 1.42 (1.08 –1.88) | 0.001 | 0.95 | 1.41 (1.08 –1.90) | 1.44 (1.10 –1.93) | 1.44 (1.08 –1.90) | −0.002 | 0.84 |
| ▵I/G30 | 8.89 (4.77 –17.49) | 9.65 (5.03 –17.79) | 9.46 (5.26 –16.74) | −0.06 | 0.70 | 8.92 (4.98 –17.49) | 9.87 (5.19 –17.76) | 9.61 (5.17 –16.97) | −0.01 | 0.94 |
Adjusted for age, sex and body mass index (BMI), except BMI was analyzed after adjusted for sex, age. Fins, 30min‐Ins, 2h‐Ins, HOMA‐B, HOMA‐IR were natural logarithm‐transformed to normal distributions before statistical analysis.
Insulin glucose ratio (▵I30/G30) = (30 min insulin – fasting insulin)/(30 min glucose – fasting glucose). Fins, fasting serums insulin level; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; PG, plasma glucose.
The bold values indicated the p value<0.05, which means the genotypes are associated with the 30m PG.