Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of genetic risk models based on risk loci identified and/or confirmed in genome-wide association studies for type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through April 13, 2012, and published data relevant to the prediction of type 2 diabetes based on genome-wide association marker-based risk models (GRMs) were included. Of the 1,234 potentially relevant articles, 21 articles representing 23 studies were eligible for inclusion. The median area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) among eligible studies was 0.60 (range, 0.55-0.68), which did not differ appreciably by study design, sample size, participants' race/ethnicity, or the number of genetic markers included in the GRMs. In addition, the AUCs for type 2 diabetes did not improve appreciably with the addition of genetic markers into conventional risk factor-based models (median AUC, 0.79 (range, 0.63-0.91) vs. median AUC, 0.78 (range, 0.63-0.90), respectively). A limited number of included studies used reclassification measures and yielded inconsistent results. In conclusion, GRMs showed a low predictive performance for risk of type 2 diabetes, irrespective of study design, participants' race/ethnicity, and the number of genetic markers included. Moreover, the addition of genome-wide association markers into conventional risk models produced little improvement in predictive performance.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.