A genotype score based on 18 risk alleles did not significantly improve the prediction of new type 2 diabetes cases over common clinical risk factors alone (C statistic 0.901 vs 0.900; P=0.49).
Cohort (n=2,377)
Does a genotype score based on 18 risk alleles improve the prediction of type 2 diabetes compared to common clinical risk factors alone in participants of the Framingham Offspring Study?
A genotype score based on 18 risk alleles does not significantly improve the prediction of type 2 diabetes beyond common clinical risk factors.
Effect estimate: OR 1.12 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.17)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.901% vs 0.9%
p-value: p=0.49
BACKGROUND: Multiple genetic loci have been convincingly associated with the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. We tested the hypothesis that knowledge of these loci allows better prediction of risk than knowledge of common phenotypic risk factors alone. METHODS: We genotyped single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at 18 loci associated with diabetes in 2377 participants of the Framingham Offspring Study. We created a genotype score from the number of risk alleles and used logistic regression to generate C statistics indicating the extent to which the genotype score can discriminate the risk of diabetes when used alone and in addition to clinical risk factors. RESULTS: There were 255 new cases of diabetes during 28 years of follow-up. The mean (+/-SD) genotype score was 17.7+/-2.7 among subjects in whom diabetes developed and 17.1+/-2.6 among those in whom diabetes did not develop (P<0.001). The sex-adjusted odds ratio for diabetes was 1.12 per risk allele (95% confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.17). The C statistic was 0.534 without the genotype score and 0.581 with the score (P=0.01). In a model adjusted for sex and self-reported family history of diabetes, the C statistic was 0.595 without the genotype score and 0.615 with the score (P=0.11). In a model adjusted for age, sex, family history, body-mass index, fasting glucose level, systolic blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, and triglyceride level, the C statistic was 0.900 without the genotype score and 0.901 with the score (P=0.49). The genotype score resulted in the appropriate risk reclassification of, at most, 4% of the subjects. CONCLUSIONS: A genotype score based on 18 risk alleles predicted new cases of diabetes in the community but provided only a slightly better prediction of risk than knowledge of common risk factors alone.
Meigs et al. (Wed,) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (n=2,377). Genotype score (18 risk alleles) vs. Clinical risk factors alone was evaluated on Discrimination of diabetes risk (C statistic in fully adjusted model) (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.17, p=0.49). A genotype score based on 18 risk alleles did not significantly improve the prediction of new type 2 diabetes cases over common clinical risk factors alone (C statistic 0.901 vs 0.900; P=0.49).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: