4.6 Article

Recipient IL28B Polymorphism Is an Important Independent Predictor of Posttransplant Diabetes Mellitus in Liver Transplant Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 12, Issue 3, Pages 737-744

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03843.x

Keywords

Diabetes mellitus; HCV; liver transplantation

Funding

  1. Public Health Service [NIDDKRO1 DK069757-01, GCRC RR00585]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

IL28B polymorphisms are strongly associated with response to treatment for HCV infection. IL28B acts on interferon-stimulated genes via the JAK-STAT pathway, which has been implicated in development of insulin resistance. We investigated whether IL28B polymorphisms are associated with posttransplant diabetes mellitus (DM). Consecutive HCV patients who underwent liver transplantation between 11995 and 12011 were studied. Genotyping of the polymorphism rs12979860 was performed on DNA collected from donors and recipients. Posttransplant DM was screened for by fasting blood glucoses every 13 months. Of 221 included patients, 69 developed posttransplant DM (31%). Twenty-two patients with recipient IL28B genotype TT (48%), 25 with IL28B genotype CT (25%) and 22 with IL28B genotype CC (29%) developed posttransplant DM. TT genotype was statistically significantly associated with posttransplant DM over time (log rank p = 0.012 for TT vs. CT and p = 0.045 for TT vs. CC). Multivariate Cox regression analysis correcting for donor age, body mass index, baseline serum glucose, baseline serum cholesterol, recipient age and treated rejection, showed that recipient IL28B genotype TT was independently associated with posttransplant DM (hazard ratio 2.51; 95% confidence interval 1.175.40; p = 0.011). We conclude that the risk of developing posttransplant DM is significantly increased in recipients carrying the TT polymorphism of the IL28B gene.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available