Table 3.
Genotype analysis of HNF1A gene, VDR gene and FTO gene polymorphisms
| Controls, n | Gestational diabetes, n | OR (95% CI) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FTO gene rs9939609 (%) | 0.011* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type TT | 73 | 59 | ||
| Heterozygous AT | 54 | 62 | 1.42 (0.86–2.24) | 0.169** |
| Homozygous AA | 18 | 39 | 2.68 (1.39–4.13) | 0.003*** |
| Dominant (AT + AA/TT) | 72 vs. 73 | 101 vs. 59 | 1.73 (1.12–2.74) | 0.018 |
| Recessive (AA/AT + TT) | 18 vs. 127 | 39 vs. 121 | 2.27 (1.23–4.19) | 0.007 |
| HNF1 gene I27L rs1169288 (%) | 0.009* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type GG | 50 | 33 | ||
| Heterozygous GT | 78 | 94 | 1.82 (1.13–3.12) | 0.026** |
| Homozygous TT | 17 | 33 | 2.94 (1.41–4.16) | 0.003*** |
| Dominant (GT + TT/GG) | 95 vs. 50 | 127 vs. 33 | 2.02 (1.21–3.38) | 0.007 |
| Recessive (TT/GT + GG) | 17 vs. 128 | 33 vs. 127 | 1.95 (1.13–3.49) | 0.036 |
| HNF1 gene S487N rs2464196 (%) | 0.919* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type CC | 61 | 64 | ||
| Heterozygous CT | 62 | 72 | 1.10 (0.67–1.80) | 0.684** |
| Homozygous TT | 22 | 24 | 1.04 (0.52–2.04) | 0.910*** |
| Dominant (CT + TT/CC) | 84 vs. 61 | 96 vs. 64 | 1.11 (0.70–1.76) | 0.683 |
| Recessive (TT/CT + CC) | 22 vs. 123 | 24 vs 136 | 0.98 (0.52–1.84) | 0.966 |
| HNF1 gene A98V rs1800574 (%) | 0.433* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type CC | 121 | 130 | ||
| Heterozygous CT | 22 | 24 | 1.01 (0.54–1.90) | 0.962** |
| Homozygous TT | 2 | 6 | 2.79 (0.55–12.45) | 0.196*** |
| Dominant model (CT + TT/CC) | 24 vs. 121 | 30 vs. 130 | 1.16 (0.64–2.10) | 0.615 |
| Recessive model (TT/CT + CC) | 2 vs. 143 | 6 vs. 154 | 2.78 (0.55–12.5) | 0.196 |
| VDR gene ApaI rs7975232 (%) | 0.199* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type AA | 52 | 48 | ||
| Heterozygous AC | 73 | 78 | 1.15 (0.69–1.91) | 0.571** |
| Homozygous CC | 20 | 34 | 1.84 (0.93–3.62) | 0.076*** |
| Dominant (AC + CC/AA) | 93 vs. 52 | 112 vs. 48 | 1.30 (0.80–2.10) | 0.279 |
| Recessive (CC/AA + AC) | 20 vs. 125 | 34 vs. 126 | 1.68 (0.92–3.02) | 0.088 |
| VDR gene TaqI rs731236 (%) | 0.472* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type TT | 82 | 81 | ||
| Heterozygous CT | 33 | 37 | 1.13 (0.64–1.98) | 0.658** |
| Homozygous CC | 30 | 42 | 1.41 (0.80–2.48) | 0.222*** |
| Dominant (CT + CC/TT) | 63 vs. 82 | 79 vs. 81 | 1.26 (0.82–2.04) | 0.301 |
| Recessive (CC/CT + TT) | 30 vs. 115 | 42 vs. 118 | 1.36 (0.81–2.32) | 0.253 |
| VDR gene BsmI rs1544410 (%) | 0.461* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type AA | 57 | 53 | ||
| Heterozygous AG | 52 | 63 | 1.32 (0.78–2.24) | 0.290** |
| Homozygous GG | 36 | 45 | 1.37 (0.76–2.44) | 0.284*** |
| Dominant (AG + GG/AA) | 88 vs. 57 | 108 vs. 53 | 1.34 (0.841–2.15) | 0.215 |
| Recessive (GG/AG + AA) | 36 vs. 109 | 45 vs. 116 | 1.18 (0.71–1.97) | 0.515 |
| VDR gene FokI rs2228570 (%) | 0.191* | |||
| Co-dominant wild type CC | 78 | 76 | ||
| Heterozygous CT | 43 | 44 | 1.05 (0.62–1.77) | 0.855** |
| Homozygous TT | 24 | 40 | 1.71 (0.94–3.10) | 0.076*** |
| Dominant (CT + TT/CC) | 67 vs. 78 | 84 vs. 76 | 1.28 (0.82–2.01) | 0.272 |
| Recessive (TT/CT + CC) | 24 vs. 121 | 40 vs. 120 | 1.68 (0.95–2.59) | 0.070 |
Categorical variables were analyzed with Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, where appropriate. Multiple logistic regression analysis and Fisher’s exact test were tested using models: dominant (major allele homozygotes vs heterozygotes + minor allele homozygotes), recessive (major allele homozygotes + heterozygotes vs minor allele homozygotes) and codominant (major allele homozygotes vs heterozygote and minor allele homozygotes vs major allele homozygotes)
Italics represents significant p-values
*p Wild vs homozygous vs heterozygous
**p heterozygous vs wild
***p homozygous vs wild type