Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 20;7(8):54. doi: 10.3390/genes7080054

Table 3.

Association between RORA SNPs and the risk of T2DM under different genetic models.

SNP Genetic Model a p Value FDR q OR [95% CI]
rs17270181 Dominant (AG + AA) vs. GG 0.183 0.231 1.32 [0.88–2.01]
rs1898413 Additive AG vs. GG 0.918 0.921 1.01 [0.81–1.26]
AA vs. GG 0.384 0.413 1.30 [0.72–2.34]
rs11638541 Dominant (AG + GG) vs. AA 0.222 0.298 1.15 [0.92–1.44]
rs8033552 Recessive AA vs. (AG + GG) 0.178 0.202 1.34 [0.87–2.05]
rs10851685 Dominant (TA + TT) vs. AA 0.025 0.032 1.38 [1.04–1.82]
rs8041381 Dominant (AG + GG) vs. AA 0.333 0.402 0.88 [0.58–1.33]
rs340002 Dominant (AG + AA) vs. GG 0.699 0.748 1.04 [0.86–1.26]
rs340023 Recessive CC vs. (CT + TT) 0.195 0.243 1.21 [0.91–1.62]
rs28724570 Recessive CC vs. (CT + TT) 0.057 0.103 1.79 [0.98–3.23]

a For each SNP, only the best genetic model determined by Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) is provided. The ORs and CIs that are statistically significant are bolded, along with the rs number of the corresponding SNP.