4.5 Article

The type I diabetes association of the IL2RA locus

期刊

GENES AND IMMUNITY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 S42-S48

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/gene.2009.90

关键词

autoimmune disease; genetic susceptibility; IL2RA; linkage disequilibrium; single-nucleotide polymorphism; type I diabetes

资金

  1. NIH [U01-DK62418]
  2. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International
  3. Genome Canada
  4. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
  5. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  6. National Center for Research Resources [U54 RR020278]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To confirm and fine map previous reports of association, the Type I Diabetes (T1D) Genetics Consortium (T1DGC) assembled a large collection of DNA samples from affected sib-pair (ASP) families with T1D (5003 affected individuals) and genotyped polymorphic markers. One of these loci, involving the IL2RA gene, had been reported to be due to three independent effects. The T1DGC genotyped 69 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that span similar to 88 kb from the 5' flanking to 3' flanking region of the IL2RA locus. The most highly associated SNP reported earlier (ss52580101) was not included in the genotyping list; however, a 5-SNP (rs3134883, rs3118470, rs7072793, rs4749955 and rs12251307) haplotype (H5) was identified that strongly tagged its minor allele with r(2) = 0.869 (95% CI, 0.850-0.885). This haplotype was significantly protective (P = 3.2 x 10(-5)) in the T1D ASP families, with an odds ratio virtually identical to that reported for ss52580101. The SNP marking the second independent locus, (rs11594656) showed no association in the T1DGC set and the third (rs2104286) could not be distinguished, by conditional regression, from H5. Instead, the most significant independent effect was detected from the 5' flanking IL2RA SNP rs4749955, which remained significant after regression for H5. Thus, we confirm independent effects at the IL2RA locus. Genes and Immunity (2009) 10, S42-S48; doi:10.1038/gene.2009.90

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