Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2008 Aug 22;14(7):544–547. doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2008.07.002

Table 2.

Allele and genotype frequencies of DBH -1021C>T (rs1611115)

Series Affection status Samples No. Genotype CC No. (%) Genotype CT No. (%) Genotype TT No. (%) C allele No. (%) T allele No. (%) Odds ratio (95% CI) p-value
US Patient 224 128 (60) 71 (33) 15 (7) 327 (76) 101 (24) 0.94 (0.69–1.28) 0.70
Control 224 125 (57) 85 (38) 11 (5) 335 (76) 107 (24)
Ireland Patient 74 116 (67) 49 (28) 8 (5) 281 (81) 65 (19) 0.84 (0.59–1.19) 0.33
Control 174 107 (62) 55 (32) 10 (6) 269 (78) 75 (22)
Norway Patient 538 368 (69) 150 (28) 13 (2) 886 (83) 176 (17) 0.81 (0.67–0.98) 0.03
Control 1138 731 (65) 344 (31) 48 (4) 1806 (80) 440 (20)
Poland Patient 101 56 (55) 37 (37) 8 (8) 149 (74) 53 (26) 2.01 (1.24–3.25) 0.01
Control 123 85 (69) 35 (28) 3 (2) 205 (83) 41 (17)

Combined Patient 1037 668 (66) 307 (30) 44 (4) 1643 (81) 395 (19) 0.91 (0.79–1.04) 0.16
Control 1659 1048 (64) 519 (32) 72 (4) 2615 (80) 663 (20)

- For the matched US and Irish series, estimated odds ratios and p-values result from single variable conditional logistic regression models. For the Norwegian, Polish, and combined series, estimated odds ratios and p-values result from logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, and series (combined series only). Under an additive model odds ratios correspond an increase of one “T” allele. Total sample sizes given for each series do not account for genotyping failure, which occurred in <2% of samples.