학술논문

Additive genetic effect of GCKR, G6PC2, and SLC30A8 variants on fasting glucose levels and risk of type 2 diabetes.
Document Type
Article
Source
PLoS ONE. 6/3/2022, Vol. 17 Issue 6, p1-15. 15p.
Subject
*TYPE 2 diabetes
*GLUCOSE
*INSULIN
*MISSENSE mutation
*BODY mass index
Language
ISSN
1932-6203
Abstract
Impaired glucose tolerance is a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and several cardiometabolic disorders. To identify genetic loci underlying fasting glucose levels, we conducted an analysis of 9,232 individuals of European ancestry who at enrollment were either nondiabetic or had untreated type 2 diabetes. Multivariable linear mixed models were used to test for associations between fasting glucose and 7.9 million SNPs, with adjustment for age, body mass index (BMI), sex, significant principal components of the genotypes, and cryptic relatedness. Three previously discovered loci were genome-wide significant, with the lead SNPs being rs1260326, a missense variant in GCKR (p = 1.06×10−8); rs560887, an intronic variant in G6PC2 (p = 3.39×10−11); and rs13266634, a missense variant in SLC30A8 (p = 4.28×10−10). Fine mapping, genome-wide conditional analysis, and functional annotation indicated that the three loci were independently associated with fasting glucose. Each copy of an alternate allele at any of these three SNPs was associated with a reduction of 0.012 mmol/L in fasting glucose levels (p = 8.0×10−28), and this association was replicated in trans-ethnic analysis of 14,303 individuals (p = 2.2×10−16). The three SNPs were jointly associated with significantly reduced T2D risk, with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.88, 0.98) per protective allele. Our findings implicate additive effects across pathophysiological pathways involved in type 2 diabetes, including glycolysis, gluconeogenesis, and insulin secretion. Since none of the individuals homozygous for the alternate alleles at all three loci has T2D, it might be possible to use a genetic predictor of fasting glucose levels to identify individuals at low vs. high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]