4.2 Article

Human leukocyte antigen class I B and C loci contribute to type 1 diabetes (T1D) susceptibility and age T1D onset

期刊

HUMAN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 66, 期 3, 页码 301-313

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humimm.2004.12.001

关键词

type 1 diabetes; HLA class 1; HLA-B; HLA-C; age at onset

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK61722, R01 DK061722, DK46626, R56 DK061722] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alleles of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class 11 genes are well known to affect susceptibility to type I diabetes (T1D), but less is known about the contribution of HLA class I alleles to T1D susceptibility. In this study, molecular genotyping was performed at the HLA-B and HLA-C loci for 283 multiplex Caucasian families, previously typed for HLA-A and the Class II loci. Allele frequencies were compared between affected siblings and affected family-based controls. Linkage disequilibrium coefficients were calculated for HLA-B-HLA-C haplotypes and for class I-class II haplotypes. After adjustment for linkage disequilibrium, the following alleles remain associated with T1D: B*1801, B*3906, B*4403, C*0303, C*0802, and C*1601. B and C allele associations were tested for certain T1D-associated DRB1-DQB1 haplotypes, with the following results: B*3801 is protective on DRBI*0401-DQBI*0302 haplotypes, both C*0701 and C*0702 are predisposing on DRBI*0404-DQBI*0302 haplotypes, and B*3906 is predisposing on DRBI*0801-DQBI*0402 haplotypes. As with previous results for HLA-A, HLA-B and HLA-C are associated with age at T1D onset (mean 11.6 +/- 0.3 years). The protective allele B*4403 was associated with older age at onset (15.1 years; p < 0.04), and the predisposing alleles C*0702 and B*3906 were associated with younger age at onset (9.5 years, p < 0.001; and 7.8 years, p < 0.002, respectively). These data support a role for HLA class I alleles in susceptibility to and age at onset of T1D. (c) American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, 2005. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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

4.2
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