4.5 Article

Association between the T-381C polymorphism of the brain natriuretic peptide gene and risk of type 2 diabetes in human populations

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 16, 期 11, 页码 1343-1350

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddm084

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [MC_U106179471] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Wellcome Trust [068545/z/02] Funding Source: Medline
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_U106179471] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP/NPPB) is a member of the natriuretic family involved in the regulation of blood pressure and blood volume as well as lipolysis control in human fat cells. Thus BNP may play a role in energy metabolism and metabolic diseases. We therefore assessed the association between the BNP promoter T-381C polymorphism and risk of type 2 diabetes and metabolic and BNP expression traits in several population samples. In French population-based samples (n = 3216), we found that individuals bearing the -381CC genotype had lower (P = 0.005) fasting glucose levels than -381TC or -381TT individuals. Moreover, the -381CC genotype vias less frequent in individuals with type 2 diabetes (n = 280, 13.6%) or with impaired fasting glucose (n = 248, 12.9%) compared with normoglycaemic individuals (n = 2485, 17.8%). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) of type 2 diabetes for -381CC individuals was 0.69 (0.47-1.00), P = 0.05, when compared with -381T allele bearers. We replicated this association in four additional case-control studies for type 2 diabetes. The overall OR (95% CI) of type 2 diabetes was 0.85 (0.76-0.96), P = 0.008, (under a recessive model) (3593 cases and 6646 controls in total). We also found that the -381C allele was associated with higher plasma BNP concentrations (P = 0.015, n = 634) and higher BNP promoter activity in reporter gene assays. Collectively, these data suggest that relatively high BNP expression may protect against type 2 diabetes in humans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据