Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 1;12(1):e2020037. doi: 10.4084/MJHID.2020.037

Table 3.

The genotype analysis of VDBP polymorphisms.

Genetic model Genotype Controls (n=40) Patients (n=44) P value OR (95% CI)
VDBP rs7041
P HWE 0.651 0.055
Co-dominant model A TT 19 (47.5) 19 (43.2) 0.145 Reference
TG 18 (45.0) 15 (34.1) 0.83 (0.32–2.12)
GG 3 (7.5) 10 (22.7) 3.33 (0.79–14.0)
Dominant model TT 19 (47.5) 19 (43.2) 0.526 Reference
TG+GG 21 (52.5) 25 (56.8) 1.19 (0.50–2.81)
Recessive model TT+TG 37 (92.5) 34 (77.3) 0.053 Reference
GG 3 (7.5) 10 (22.7) 3.62 (0.9–14.2)
Allelic model T 56 (70.0) 53 (66.3) 0.185 Reference
G 24 (300) 35 (43.7) 1.53 (0.80–2.94)
VDBP rs4588
P HWE 0.563 0.117
Co-dominant model A CC 21 (52.5) 24 (54.5) 0.316 Reference
CA 17 (42.5) 14 (31.8) 0.72 (0.28–1.80)
AA 2 (5.0) 6 (13.6) 2.62 (0.47–14.4)
Dominant model CC 21 (52.5) 24 (54.5) 0.851 Reference
CA+AA 19 (47.5) 20 (45.5) 0.92 (0.39–2.17)
Recessive model CC+CA 38 (98.0) 38 (86.4) 0.178 Reference
AA 2 (5.0) 6 (13.6) 3.0 (0.56–15.8)
Allelic model C 59 (73.7) 62 (77.5) 0.634 Reference
A 21 (26.3) 26 (32.5) 1.17 (0.59–2.33)

VDBP: vitamin D binding protein. Values are shown as number (%). HWE P; P value of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. Chi square (χ2) or Fisher's exact tests were used. OR (95% CI), odds ratio and confidence interval.

(A) represented both heterozygote and homozygote comparison models. Statistically significant results were set at P-value < 0.05.