Table 4. Association between polymorphisms in FOXO1 and the risk of T2DM.
| SNPs | Genotypes | Control (n = 290) | T2DM (n = 414) | Additive | Dominant | Recessive | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P | OR (95% CI) | P | OR (95% CI) | P | ||||
| rs17592236 | TT | 39 (14.9) | 59 (15.1) | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| CT | 121 (46.2) | 170 (43.5) | 1.088 (0.676–1.759) | 0.729 | 1.085 (0.654–1.600) | 0.922 | 0.896 (0.647–1.241) | 0.508 | |
| CC | 102 (38.9) | 162 (41.4) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| rs9577066 | AA | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| AC | 8 (3.1) | 10 (2.7) | - | - | - | - | 0.811 (0.312–2.110) | 0.668 | |
| CC | 252 (96.9) | 364 (97.3) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| rs7986407 | AA | 20 (7.4) | 47 (12.0) | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| AG | 91 (33.6) | 150 (38.4) | 2.092 (1.178–3.731) | 0.012 | 1.789 (1.024–3.125) | 0.041 | 1.585 (1.149–2.188) | 0.005 | |
| GG | 160 (59.0) | 194 (49.6) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| rs4581585 | CC | 17 (6.5) | 51 (14.1) | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| CT | 132 (50.6) | 157 (43.5) | 2.571 (1.404–4.695) | 0.002 | 2.457 (1.374–4.405) | 0.002 | 1.071 (0.770–1.488) | 0.686 | |
| TT | 112 (42.9) | 153 (42.4) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| rs4325426 | CC | 16 (6.2) | 25 (6.7) | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| AC | 121 (46.5) | 147 (39.2) | 1.272 (0.642–2.519) | 0.491 | 1.075 (0.556–2.083) | 0.828 | 0.758 (0.549–1.046) | 0.092 | |
| AA | 123 (47.3) | 203 (54.1) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
Genotype distributions were shown with number (%). ORs, 95% CI, and P values were from logistic regression analyses with additive, dominant, and recessive models controlling for age and sex as covariates. In additive models, ORs was expressed per difference in number of rare allele. Genotype was given codes of (0, 1, and 2), (0, 1, and 1), (0, 0, and 1) in additive, dominant and recessive models, respectively.
FOXO1 = forkhead box O1, T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus, SNP = single nucleotide polymorphism, OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval.