Skip to main content
. 2017 Nov 21;6(4):197–203. doi: 10.22088/BUMS.6.4.197

Table 3.

The distribution of genotypes in T2DM cases and controls

Model Genotypes Patients
N(%)
Controls
N (%)
OR
(95% CI)
P
rs1801214
Codominant CC
CT
TT
102 (45.9)
100 (45.0)
20 (9.0)
78 (37)
96 (45.5)
37 (17.5)
1.00
0.80 (0.53-1.20)
0.41 (0.22-0.77)
0.016909
Dominant CC 102 ( 45.9) 150 (50.0) 1.00 0.057837
CT+TT 120 (54.1) 78 (37) 0.69 (0.47-1.01)
Recessive CC+CT 202 ( 91.0) 174 (82.5) 1.00 0.008355
TT 20 (9.0) 37 (17.5) 0.47 (0.26– 0.83)
Overdominant CC+TT 122 ( 55.0) 115 (54.5) 1.00 0.924656
CT 100 (45.0) 96 (45.5) 0.98 (0.67–1.43)
log-Additive - - - 0.68 (0.52-0.91) 0.007539
rs1046320
Codominant AA 134 (60. 4) 100 (48.5) 1.00 0.030530
AG 73 (32.9) 82 (39.8) 0.66 (0.44- 1.00)
GG 15 (6.8) 24 (11.7) 0.47 (0.23-0.93)
Dominant AA 134 (60.4) 100 (48.5) 1.00 0.014049
AG+GG 88 (39.6) 106 (51.5) 0.62 (0.42-0.91)
Recessive AA+AG 207(93.2) 182 (88.3) 1.00 0.078039
GG 15 (6.8) 24(11.7) 0.55 (0.28-1.08)
Overdominant AA+GG 149 (67.1) 124 (60.2) 1.00 0.136481
AG 73 (32.9) 82 (39.8) 0.74 (0.50-1.10)
log-Additive - - - 0.68 (0.50-0.91) 0.008313

CI: confidence interval; N/A: not applicable; OR: odds ratio. P values for the most probable genetic models are indicated with bold face, and are statistically significant.