Diabetologia

, 51:1100 | Cite as

Newly identified loci highlight beta cell dysfunction as a key cause of type 2 diabetes: Where are the insulin resistance genes?

Review

Abstract

Although type 2 diabetes has been traditionally understood as a metabolic disorder initiated by insulin resistance, it has recently become apparent that an impairment in insulin secretion contributes to its manifestation and may play a prominent role in its early pathophysiology. The genetic dissection of Mendelian and, more recently, polygenic types of diabetes confirms the notion that primary defects in insulin synthesis, processing and/or secretion often give rise to the common form of this disorder. This concept, first advanced with the discovery and physiological characterisation of various genetic subtypes of MODY, has been extended to other forms of monogenic diabetes (e.g. neonatal diabetes). It has also led to the identification of common risk variants via candidate gene approaches (e.g. the E23K polymorphism in KCNJ11 or common variants in the MODY genes), and it has been validated by the description of the robust physiological effects conferred by polymorphisms in the TCF7L2 gene. More recently, the completion and integration of genome-wide association scans for this disease has uncovered a number of heretofore unsuspected variants, several of which also affect insulin secretion. This review provides an up-to-date account of genetic loci that influence risk of common type 2 diabetes via impairment of beta cell function, outlines their presumed mechanisms of action, and places them in the context of gene–gene and/or gene–environment interactions. Finally, a strategy for the analogous discovery of insulin resistance genes is proposed.

Keywords

Genetic associations Genome-wide association study Insulin secretion Pancreatic beta cell Single nucleotide polymorphisms 

Abbreviations

GLP-1

glucagon-like peptide 1

GWAS

genome-wide association scan

HNF

hepatocyte nuclear factor

HOMA-IR

homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance

siRNA

small interfering RNA

SNP

single nucleotide polymorphism

Introduction

The simple metabolic characterisation of type 1 diabetes as an insulin deficiency syndrome and type 2 diabetes as a primarily insulin-resistant state has been superseded by more refined understanding of the pathophysiology of non-autoimmune forms of diabetes. While hyperinsulinaemia has long been recognised as a primary feature of type 2 diabetes [1, 2], the hyperglycaemia that defines the diagnosis is now viewed as a consequence of a complex interplay between insulin sensitivity and secretion, with a failure of pancreatic beta cells to compensate sufficiently for the increased insulin requirement induced by insulin resistance [3]. Thus, in metabolic studies of beta cell function, insulin secretion should always be interpreted in the context of concomitant insulin sensitivity [4].

Whether insulin resistance or insufficient insulin secretion represents the primary defect in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes remains a matter of debate [5, 6, 7]. Because glucose tolerance is achieved by the combination of insulin secretion and insulin action, hyperglycaemia (even with values that stay within the normal range) can manifest itself when one component fails and there is no concomitant improvement in the other. While many individuals who are insulin resistant never develop diabetes (indicating the need for a beta cell defect for full-blown hyperglycaemia to manifest itself), secretory deficits can also be demonstrated in normoglycaemic individuals. Thus, it appears that both derangements are necessary, but not sufficient to reach the levels of hyperglycaemia that yield a clinical diagnosis, and that one may occur without the other prior to the onset of overt disease.

This controversy has involved the genetic field. Clearly, a genetic variant that predisposes an individual toward reduced insulin secretion or increased insulin resistance would confer temporal precedence in the pathophysiological cascade to the particular parameter with which it is associated. Epidemiologists who track the current twin explosions of obesity and type 2 diabetes correctly conclude that the environment must play a large role in the epidemic of insulin resistance, as these recent (and rapid) secular trends could not have been driven by genetic changes. Thus, an attractive model has been proposed in which type 2 diabetes emerges when environmentally triggered insulin resistance takes place in the context of genetically programmed beta cell dysfunction [8, 9].

Several predictions could be drawn from this hypothesis: first, genetic mutations that solely affect the beta cell should cause diabetes; second, an unbiased screen for genetic variants associated with common type 2 diabetes should yield a preponderance of beta cell genes; and third, if genetic variants exist that lead to insulin resistance, their mode of action should take place in the context of an interaction with the environment. In the sections that follow, the accumulating evidence supporting each of these three corollaries will be described and an approach to the discovery of insulin resistance genes will be proposed.

Monogenic diabetes

The MODY genes: from Mendelian to common disease

The clinical characterisation of MODY established that diabetes could develop on a familial basis without the requirement of insulin resistance [10]. The concerted application of modern genetic linkage and positional cloning techniques led to the successive identification of six MODY genes (HNF4A, GCK, TCF1 [also known as HNF1A], PDX1, TCF2 [also known as HNF1B] and NEUROD1), which, overall, are involved in ~85% of MODY cases [11]. All six MODY genes are expressed in the beta cell, with glucokinase (encoded by GCK) serving as the glucose sensor that controls the set point for insulin secretion, and the rest acting as transcription factors regulating pancreatic beta cell development and final beta cell mass. These landmark discoveries both established a genetic basis for hyperglycaemia and focused attention on the pancreatic beta cell as a key component in its pathogenesis [12].

In the search for inherited factors that contribute to the more common form of type 2 diabetes, genes implicated in monogenic forms of diabetes—in which a single mutation that has dramatic functional consequences can, by itself, produce the phenotype—have naturally been considered prime biological candidates. Under this paradigm, genetic variants that have a less radical effect on gene expression, transcript processing and/or protein function may induce a metabolic alteration that is sufficient to give rise to a milder form of the disease. Because of the less stringent negative selection pressure on these polymorphisms compared with those linked to a more detrimental phenotype, they would presumably rise to fairly common frequencies in the population. Consequently, common variation in the MODY genes has been studied exhaustively for association with type 2 diabetes.

The MODY gene that has been most extensively examined for association with common type 2 diabetes is HNF4A, in part due to its location under a widely replicated linkage peak on chromosome 20 q (reviewed in [13]). Two promoter single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in HNF4A were originally associated with type 2 diabetes in two studies of white populations [14, 15]; this was confirmed in two subsequent large association studies [16, 17], although they yielded more modest ORs. A fifth very large study obtained consistent evidence in a Scandinavian sample of over 3,000 individuals, but failed to find support in two other white case–control samples totalling over 4,000 individuals [18]. A comprehensive meta-analysis of over 18,000 people has documented a very modest (combined OR ~1.07), but statistically significant (p = 0.003) association for the original SNPs, although coloured by substantial heterogeneity (L. J. Scott, Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, personal communication). It therefore appears that variants in HNF4A contribute a very small proportion of type 2 diabetes risk.

The MODY 3 gene TCF1 (encoding hepatocyte nuclear factor 1α [HNF1α]) has also received significant attention. In two companion large-scale association studies, meta-analyses of previously published data showed possible associations of two missense SNPs, A98V and I27L, with type 2 diabetes [19, 20]. While inclusion of novel large case–control samples moved both summary ORs towards the null, a current meta-analysis for the A98V polymorphism (J. C. Florez, unpublished results) shows an OR of 1.17 (95% CI 1.03–1.33, p = 0.02). Later studies have furnished additional supporting evidence for other SNPs in this gene, including I27L [21, 22, 23, 24]. Although a current unpublished meta-analysis of case–control studies for this latter SNP has shown no association (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99–1.07, p = 0.17), the leucine allele affects the transcriptional activity of HNF1α, is associated with decreased insulin secretion, and appears to raise the risk of diabetes in overweight and/or elderly persons [21, 22, 23, 24]. More recently, it has also been shown to predict diabetes onset in a prospective study of a very large Swedish cohort (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1–1.3, p = 0.0002) [25].

Of particular interest is the intronic SNP rs757210 in TCF2 (encoding HNF1β). A comprehensive study of several MODY genes noted a modest but robust association of this SNP with type 2 diabetes, which was replicated in additional independent populations: a combined analysis of the >15,000 samples yielded an overall OR of 1.12 and a convincing p value of <10−6 [26]. Results consistent with this finding had been obtained in another comprehensive study of MODY genes [21]. Even more intriguing is the association of the protective allele at the same locus with prostate cancer [27], a coincidence that remains unexplained.

Of the other MODY genes, large-scale association studies and meta-analyses have shown an association of the G–30A SNP in the GCK promoter with fasting glucose [25, 26, 28]. On the other hand, the previously reported association of the missense A45T SNP in NEUROD1 with type 2 diabetes has not been substantiated in a comprehensive meta-analysis [29]. Suggestive results for other polymorphisms [21, 26] need to be convincingly replicated to muster persuasive statistical evidence.

With regard to the effect of these associations on beta cell function, a decrease in insulin secretion has been documented for the A98V and I27L SNPs in TCF1 [22]; nevertheless, the expression patterns and the known impact of functional mutations in these genes on beta cells make it reasonable to presume that other polymorphisms in MODY genes, if truly associated with type 2 diabetes, will likely cause hyperglycaemia via analogous mechanisms of action. Polymorphisms in GCK may lead to a resetting of the beta cell glucostat, while other MODY variants may reduce beta cell mass.

The gene encoding wolframin: from syndromic to common diabetes

Wolfram syndrome is an autosomal dominant syndromic form of diabetes characterised by diabetes insipidus, diabetes mellitus, optic atrophy and deafness. Affected children develop the clinical manifestations of sensory neuron and beta cell degeneration at approximately 6–8 years of age, and often succumb to the disease. Positional cloning identified the gene WFS1 on chromosome 4p16 as the cause of the syndrome. Its protein product, wolframin, is expressed in the membranes of neurons and pancreatic beta cells and regulates calcium fluxes in the endoplasmic reticulum [30]. Most mutations that give rise to Wolfram syndrome occur in exon 8 and have major effects on the expressed protein [31].

A team of UK investigators recently evaluated WFS1 and 83 other candidate genes for association with type 2 diabetes in a set of four white case–control populations [32]. Of 1,536 SNPs genotyped at an initial stage, 18 were promoted to the second stage and two achieved statistical replication. Both SNPs, which accounted for the same association signal, were located in WFS1. These and two other correlated SNPs were robustly (p ∼ 10−7) but modestly (OR ~0.90) associated with type 2 diabetes in a larger set of 9,533 cases and 11,389 controls [32]. This association has been confirmed in several independent cohorts [33, 34], and the implicated polymorphisms appear to increase diabetes risk by compromising beta cell function [34].

Polygenic diabetes

KCNJ11: from Mendelian to common disease, and back

The gene that encodes the islet ATP-sensitive potassium channel Kir6.2 (KCNJ11) spans 1 kb and is located directly downstream of the gene encoding the sulfonylurea receptor SUR1 (ABCC8) in the same region of chromosome 11. Both molecules interact physically and functionally to regulate the potassium inward rectifier current and, thereby, beta cell depolarisation, the trigger for insulin release [35]. KCNJ11 was another excellent biological candidate presumed to harbour genetic variants contributing to type 2 diabetes, in part because of known mutations that inactivate the channel and give rise to persistent hyperinsulinaemia of infancy [36], and in part because of the precedent afforded by PPARG, the gene that encodes the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ, itself a target for medications that lower insulin resistance: the P12A polymorphism in PPARG had been conclusively associated with common type 2 diabetes [37].

A missense variant that changes a glutamic acid residue to lysine at position 23 (E23K) was examined in several early studies that failed to document a significant association [37, 38, 39, 40]. As is often the case, larger sample sizes and subsequent meta-analyses confirmed that the E23K polymorphism in KCNJ11 is also reproducibly associated with type 2 diabetes [41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47], with an OR near 1.15 (p < 10−7). Functional studies indicate that this polymorphism significantly influences channel gating properties [48, 49, 50]. In vivo, human carriers of the lysine risk allele demonstrate impaired insulin secretion [44, 46]. In a research path that retraced the steps of the one travelled by the MODY genes, mutations that have a more potent effect on channel activation have been recently implicated in a subtype of permanent neonatal diabetes [51].

TCF7L2: the genetic ceiling for type 2 diabetes?

When deCODE (Reykjavik, Iceland) investigators zeroed in on a region of chromosome 10 under a linkage peak and identified polymorphisms in the gene that encodes transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) as likely contributors to type 2 diabetes, they launched an entirely new direction in diabetes research [52]. In early 2006, Grant et al. reported that a common microsatellite in the TCF7L2 gene region (DG10S478) was associated with type 2 diabetes in an Icelandic case–control sample (n = 2,116), and replicated this result in two additional case–control white cohorts (n = 1,658) [53]. The overall estimated allelic relative risk was 1.56 (p = 7.8 × 10−15 after Bonferroni correction for the number of alleles tested). The non-coding SNPs rs12255372 and rs7903146 were in strong linkage disequilibrium with DG10S478, and showed comparably robust associations with type 2 diabetes.

A quick succession of positive replication studies followed. Two meta-analyses of the accumulated evidence (~50,000 individuals) reveal the remarkable consistency of this finding, and yield an overall p value of <10−80 [54, 55]. The preponderance of the evidence indicates an additive effect, with a single copy of the risk allele conferring ~40% risk, and two copies (carried by ~10% of the European or African populations) conferring ~80% risk of type 2 diabetes. In addition to rs7903146 [56], a different downstream variant in the same gene seems to increase diabetes risk in Asians [57].

TCF4 (the protein product of TCF7L2) belongs to a family of transcription factors that contain high mobility group box DNA-binding domains; it binds β catenin after Wnt activation of its receptor, and this transcriptional complex induces the expression of TCF4 target genes. Tcf7l2 homozygous null mice lack gut epithelial stem cells, which leads to marked deficits in the enteroinsular system [58]. This specialised gastrointestinal cell compartment is responsible for the manufacture of incretins, hormones secreted by the gut in response to an oral energy load, which regulate gut motility, satiety and energy homeostasis [59]. Pre-eminent among them is glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), which among other functions stimulates insulin secretion by the pancreatic beta cell; it turns out that TCF4 trans-activates the gene that encodes GLP-1 [60].

The link between TCF7L2 and GLP-1 pointed to the beta cell as the locus in which variants in TCF7L2 might increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. Consistent with this hypothesis, we [61, 62] and others [63, 64, 65] showed that carriers of the risk T allele at rs7903146 have diminished insulin secretion after an oral glucose load. In elegant studies, Lyssenko and colleagues have further shown that the incretin effect is also diminished in risk allele carriers [65]. However the simple model by which gut-secreted GLP-1 mediates the effects of TCF7L2 has been challenged by newer evidence showing that the defect in insulin secretion can also be seen in risk allele carriers after an intravenous glucose load [66], and that the genotype at TCF7L2 does not appear to affect basal or glucose-stimulated GLP-1 levels; rather, risk allele carriers demonstrate diminished GLP-1-induced insulin secretion [67]. Interestingly, a recent report shows that the proliferation induced by GLP-1 agonists in INS-1 or mouse primary beta cells requires active Wnt signalling, and that this effect is inhibited by the dominant-negative mutant of TCF7L2 [68]. Simultaneously, another group has shown that knockdown of TCF7L2 expression with small interfering RNA (siRNA) leads to increased apoptosis and decreased proliferation of human beta cells [69]. Thus, these various lines of evidence suggest that TCF7L2 is at work in the beta cell itself, and may modulate beta cell mass.

An alternative hypothesis that is also consistent with the above findings suggests that TCF7L2 causes a defect in insulin processing [70]. Human islets isolated from T allele carriers exhibit increased TCF7L2 expression (even after adjusting for diabetes status), and expression of TCF7L2 is correlated with expression of the gene for insulin (INS) [65]. Consistent with this model, siRNA knockdown of TCF7L2 leads to lower Ins gene expression and lower glucose-mediated insulin secretion in mouse insulinoma cells [71], as well as impaired glucose-stimulated insulin secretion in human beta cells [69]. Despite higher levels of insulin gene expression and higher measurable proinsulin in serum [70, 72], T allele carriers have diminished insulin secretion both in vivo [61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66] and in vitro [65]. Thus, genotype at TCF7L2 seems to insert a block between INS gene expression and post-translational processing or secretion, although this relative increase in proinsulin levels may just be a marker of general beta cell dysfunction.

Multiple genome-wide association scans (GWAS) have shown that TFC7L2 variants confer the strongest effect on type 2 diabetes risk yet described (see below). Given its ability to predict diabetes incidence in people who are already at high risk of the disease [61, 73], there is great interest in intervening to counteract its biological effects. In support of the hypothesis by which insulin resistance enables the clinical manifestation of genetic beta cell defects, a lifestyle intervention that causes weight loss reduced diabetes incidence to baseline levels even in carriers of the risk variant [61, 73]. Understanding the mechanism by which intronic variants in this gene cause defective insulin secretion is one of the great priorities of ongoing diabetes research, which has been spawned by well-designed and adequately powered genetic association studies in humans.

Genome-wide association studies

GWAS have both validated known genes and revealed several novel type 2 diabetes loci. The first GWAS reproduced the robust association of TCF7L2 (OR 1.65, p < 10−7) while also identifying SLC30A8 (OR 1.26, p < 10−6) and HHEX (OR 1.21, p < 10−5) as two new type 2 diabetes-associated genomic regions [74]. Three additional high-density GWAS, which shared results and were published jointly (representing an aggregate of 32,000 samples), confirmed the known TCF7L2, KCNJ11 and PPARG associations as well as the recently published HHEX and SCL30A8 associations. They also discovered the novel diabetes loci CDKAL1 (OR 1.12, p < 10−10), IGF2BP2 (OR 1.14, p < 10−15) and CDKN2A/B (OR 1.20, p < 10−14) [75, 76, 77]. Simultaneously, the deCODE investigators and their collaborators corroborated the strong signal of TCF7L2 and replicated the HHEX and SCL30A8 findings, while independently identifying CDKAL1 as an additional locus [78]. An initial association of a variant in the FTO gene with diabetes was subsequently discovered to be mediated via its impact on obesity [79]. Suggestive variants reported by GWAS conducted at lower density and/or in smaller samples [80, 81, 82, 83, 84] await replication in additional cohorts before they reach similar levels of genome-wide statistical significance (p ~ 5 × 10−8).

Interestingly, many of the newly discovered variants appear to influence insulin secretion rather than insulin resistance (Table 1). For example, Steinthorsdottir et al. demonstrated insulin secretion defects in risk allele carriers at CDKAL1 and SLC30A8 [78]. Pascoe et al. performed 75 g OGTTs and hyperinsulinaemic–euglycaemic clamps in 1,276 European participants, and showed that variants in CDKAL1 and HHEX are associated with decreased pancreatic beta cell function as measured by the 30 min insulin response, even after correction for insulin resistance; no variant was associated with insulin sensitivity [85]. Grarup et al. simultaneously reported that variants of HHEX, CDKN2A/B and IGF2BP2 were associated with type 2 diabetes, and SNPs within the HHEX and CDKN2A/B loci impaired glucose-induced insulin release in a Danish population sample and in healthy Danes [86]. Staiger et al. found that the major alleles of the SLC30A8 SNP rs13266634 and the HHEX SNP rs7923837 were associated with reduced insulin secretion stimulated by orally administered glucose, but not with insulin resistance [87]. A quantitative trait analysis of GWAS-identified diabetes susceptibility loci was recently completed by Palmer and colleagues in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis (IRAS) Family Study [88]. In this cohort of 1,268 Hispanic and 581 African-American participants, the diabetes risk allele at CDKAL1 was associated with a diminished acute insulin response during the IVGTT, and risk variants at SLC30A8 and IGF2BP2 appeared to be associated with a reduced disposition index. In sum, with few exceptions, the overwhelming majority of newly discovered diabetes genes appear to influence pancreatic beta cell function (see Fig. 1).
Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of the pancreatic beta cell showing the proposed subcellular localisation of proteins encoded by diabetes-associated genes. GCK encodes glucokinase, the glucose sensor of the beta cell. KCNJ11 encodes the islet ATP-sensitive potassium channel Kir6.2, which interacts with the sulfonylurea receptor (SUR1, encoded by ABCC8) to regulate potassium currents across the cell membrane. HNF4A, TCF1 (encoding HNF1α), TCF2 (encoding HNF1β), HHEX and TCF7L2 encode transcription factors produced in the beta cell and implicated in pancreatic development. WFS1 encodes wolframin, a protein that regulates calcium transport in the endoplasmic reticulum. SLC30A8 encodes the ZnT-8 transporter responsible for transporting zinc into insulin secretion granules. CDKAL1 and CDKN2A/B are involved in the cyclin-dependent kinase pathway, and may thus influence beta cell regeneration. IGF2BP2 encodes a protein that binds IGF2 mRNA and directs it to specific subcellular locations for protein synthesis. It should be noted that many of these genes are also expressed in several other human tissues

Table 1

Genetic variants associated with type 2 diabetes at genome-wide significance known to influence beta cell function

Marker

Chr.

Description

Nearest gene

Gene function/mechanism of action

Risk allele

Approximate effect size for type 2 diabetes association

p value

Insulin secretion associations

Key references

rs5219

11

Missense: E23K

KCNJ11

Kir6.2 potassium channel; regulates rectifier current in beta cell under control of ATP

T

1.14

5 × 10−11

Ins Index

[41, 42, 43, 44, 46]

rs7903146

10

Intronic

TCF7L2

Transcription factor; trans-activates genes encoding proglucagon and insulin

T

1.37

1 × 10−48

Ins Index, AIR

[53,61, 62, 65]

rs757210

17

Intronic

TCF2

Transcription factor involved in pancreatic development

A

1.10

8 × 10−10

 

[26, 27]

rs13266634

8

Missense: R325W

SLC30A8

Beta cell zinc transporter ZnT-8; insulin storage and secretion

C

1.15

1 × 10−10

CIR, insulin AUC, DI

[74, 78, 87, 88]

rs1111875

10

7.7 kb downstream

HHEX

Transcription factor involved in pancreatic development

C

1.15

7 × 10−17

I/G30, Ins Index, AIR, insulin AUC

[74, 85, 86, 87]

rs10946398

6

Intronic

CDKAL1

Homologous to CDK5RAP1, cyclin-dependent kinase 5 inhibitor; islet glucotoxicity sensor

C

1.14

2 × 10−18

CIR, I/G30, AIR

[75, 76, 77, 78, 85, 88]

rs4402960

3

Intronic

IGF2BP2

IGF2 mRNA binding protein; pancreatic development

T

1.14

9 × 10−16

DI

[75, 76, 77, 88]

rs10811661

9

125 kb upstream

CDKN2A/B

Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor and p15 tumour suppressor; islet regeneration

T

1.20

8 × 10−15

Ins Index, AIR

[75, 76, 77, 86]

rs10010131

4

Intron–exon junction

WFS1

Endoplasmic reticulum transmembrane protein

G

1.12

5 × 10−11

Ins Index

[32, 33, 34]

Effect size and p values were obtained from Frayling et al. [100], except those for WFS1, which were obtained from Franks et al. [33]. Variants that have suggestive evidence of association with type 2 diabetes but have not yet reached genome-wide significance levels (p ∼ 5 × 10−8) are not included

AIR, acute insulin response; AUC, area under the curve during a 2 h OGTT; Chr., chromosome; CIR, corrected insulin response; DI, disposition index; Ins Index, insulinogenic index; I/G30, the Δ insulin response between 0 and 30 min divided by the 30 min glucose level during an OGTT

Are there insulin resistance genes?

Although rare mutations can cause extreme insulin resistance [89], there seems to be a dearth of common genetic variants in established pathways of insulin action that contribute to type 2 diabetes. Indeed, as outlined above, other than PPARG (discovered by candidate gene approaches [37]) and FTO (discovered by GWAS [79]), most of the newly identified loci are associated with insulin secretion defects. There are several possible explanation for the relative scarcity of insulin resistance genes discovered via GWAS (see text box: Potential reasons for the relative scarcity of insulin resistance genes found via GWAS approaches).

First, study design may be partially responsible. For example, in the GWAS by Sladek et al. [74] diabetic cases were pre-selected below a BMI cut-off value, and in the Diabetes Genetics Initiative GWAS [74] cases and controls were matched for BMI; both deliberate interventions are more likely to bias the scan towards variants that increase diabetes risk without having an effect on BMI. Since BMI and insulin resistance are highly correlated, a design that minimises the contribution of BMI is more likely to identify genetic variants that contribute to hyperglycaemia via defects in beta cell function rather than via peripheral insulin resistance induced by adiposity. In support of this notion, the well-known diabetes-associated polymorphism P12A in PPARG (a target for thiazolidinediones) achieved unimpressive p values in both of these scans [74, 75], whereas it reached a higher level of statistical significance in scans that did not condition the selection of cases on BMI [76, 77].

Second, OGTT-derived surrogate measures of insulin secretion such as the insulinogenic index are, on average, ~10% more heritable than OGTT-derived measures of insulin resistance such as homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). This suggests that the environment accounts for a larger proportion of the variance in insulin resistance, and study designs that take into account appropriate covariates (such as obesity traits) are more likely to identify true biological effects.

Third, variants that increase insulin resistance may be fewer in number, less frequent in the population or have more modest effects. Thus, while real, their identification may require deeper explorations down the p value distribution and nuanced replication strategies across GWAS.

Finally, in the GWAS for which HOMA-IR values are publicly available (http://www.broad.mit.edu/diabetes, accessed 8 April 2008) [75], the search for HOMA-IR associations was performed in controls whose normoglycaemic status had been ascertained both in the fasting state and after a glucose challenge; while appropriately conservative to exclude participants in whom metabolic derangements may have affected this measure, the establishment of a stringent threshold at the upper bound of normal glucose tolerance must have narrowed the variance around this measure, and thus hampered our ability to demonstrate strong genetic associations with insulin resistance.

Several lines of evidence support the foregoing assertions. While the heritability of insulin resistance traits may be lower than those related to insulin secretion, it is still substantial (in the order of ~0.40 in the Framingham Heart Study [90], for instance). This suggests that insulin resistance genes are there to be found, perhaps further down the p value distribution. It should be noted that the various published GWAS did not have full power to detect all of the true positive associations, and the initial analyses have been appropriately conservative. Furthermore, given the correlation between obesity and insulin resistance, the extent and compartmentalisation of adiposity is likely to modulate the effects of genes that influence insulin sensitivity. For example, adjusting for BMI reduced the heritability of HOMA-IR from 0.49 to 0.45 in the Framingham Heart Study [90]. Of the few known genes presumed to induce insulin resistance by their molecular mechanism of action, BMI × genotype interactions have been noted for the PPARG P12A polymorphism [91, 92, 93, 94, 95] and, more recently, for the missense K121Q polymorphism in the gene encoding ectoenzyme nucleotide pyrophosphate phosphodiesterase (ENPP1) [96, 97, 98]. This general observation outlines a possible scenario in which a genetic predisposition to insulin resistance may initially have a beneficial effect on BMI, which counterbalances the genetically driven decrease in insulin sensitivity; however, if BMI rises as a result of environmental or other genetic factors, the higher level of insulin resistance caused by both insults (the genetic variant in question plus increased weight) would catapult an individual’s glycaemic profile into the diabetic range [99]. Thus, the suggestion that insulin resistance variants may be more detectable within an obesogenic background implies that BMI should be taken into account in the search for such variants. At the same time, whether a particular polymorphism exerts its metabolic effect via BMI (as in the case of FTO [79]), or the effect size is simply augmented in the context of increased obesity, must be carefully ascertained in appropriately designed studies.

Conclusions

The discovery and description of monogenic forms of diabetes demonstrated that hyperglycaemia could be caused by primary beta cell defects. The identification of novel common polymorphisms that increase risk of type 2 diabetes, and their recent metabolic characterisation, has extended this fundamental observation. Both sets of findings, however, do not rule out a genetic contribution to insulin resistance. A targeted search for such variants in well-powered samples, in which individual obesity measures are available as covariates and the absence of external constraints ensures a wide range of insulin resistance, followed by an intelligent replication strategy, may indeed reveal the largely missing piece in the genetic foundation of type 2 diabetes.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank W. Winckler for assistance with the current TCF1 meta-analyses. Supported by National Institutes of Health Research Career Development Award 1 K23 DK65978-04.

Duality of interest

J. C. Florez has received a consulting honorarium from Publicis Healthcare Communications Group, a global advertising agency engaged by Amylin Pharmaceuticals.

References

  1. 1.
    Yalow RS, Berson SA (1960) Immunoassay of endogenous plasma insulin in man. J Clin Invest 39:1157–1175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reaven GM, Bernstein R, Davis B, Olefsky JM (1976) Nonketotic diabetes mellitus: insulin deficiency or insulin resistance? Am J Med 60:80–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ferrannini E (1998) Insulin resistance versus insulin deficiency in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: problems and prospects. Endocr Rev 19:477–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kahn SE (2003) The relative contributions of insulin resistance and beta-cell dysfunction to the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 46:3–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lillioja S, Mott DM, Spraul M et al (1993) Insulin resistance and insulin secretory dysfunction as precursors of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Prospective studies of Pima Indians. N Engl J Med 329:1988–1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haffner SM, Miettinen H, Gaskill SP, Stern MP (1995) Decreased insulin secretion and increased insulin resistance are independently related to the 7-year risk of NIDDM in Mexican-Americans. Diabetes 44:1386–1391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gerich JE (2000) Insulin resistance is not necessarily an essential component of type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85:2113–2115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pimenta W, Korytkowski M, Mitrakou A et al (1995) Pancreatic beta-cell dysfunction as the primary genetic lesion in NIDDM. Evidence from studies in normal glucose-tolerant individuals with a first-degree NIDDM relative. JAMA 273:1855–1861PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Polonsky KS, Sturis J, Bell GI (1996) Non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus—a genetically programmed failure of the beta cell to compensate for insulin resistance. N Engl J Med 334:777–783PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fajans SS, Bell GI, Polonsky KS (2001) Molecular mechanisms and clinical pathophysiology of maturity-onset diabetes of the young. N Engl J Med 345:971–980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vaxillaire M, Froguel P (2006) Genetic basis of maturity-onset diabetes of the young. Endocrinol Metab Clin N Am 35:371–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bell G, Polonsky KS (2001) Diabetes mellitus and genetically programmed defects in beta-cell function. Nature 414:788–791PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Florez JC, Hirschhorn JN, Altshuler D (2003) The inherited basis of diabetes mellitus: implications for the genetic analysis of complex traits. Annu Rev Genom Hum Genet 4:257–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Love-Gregory LD, Wasson J, Ma J et al (2004) A common polymorphism in the upstream promoter region of the hepatocyte nuclear factor-4α gene on chromosome 20 q is associated with type 2 diabetes and appears to contribute to the evidence for linkage in an Ashkenazi Jewish population. Diabetes 53:1134–1140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Silander K, Mohlke KL, Scott LJ et al (2004) Genetic variation near the hepatocyte nuclear factor-4α gene predicts susceptibility to type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 53:1141–1149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weedon MN, Owen KR, Shields B et al (2004) Common variants of the hepatocyte nuclear factor-4α P2 promoter are associated with type 2 diabetes in the U.K. population. Diabetes 53:3002–3006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hansen SK, Rose CS, Glumer C et al (2005) Variation near the hepatocyte nuclear factor (HNF)-4α gene associates with type 2 diabetes in the Danish population. Diabetologia 48:452–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Winckler W, Graham RR, de Bakker PIW et al (2005) Association testing of variants in the hepatocyte nuclear factor 4α gene with risk of type 2 diabetes in 7,883 people. Diabetes 54:886–892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Winckler W, Burtt NP, Holmkvist J et al (2005) Association of common variation in the HNF1α gene region with risk of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 54:2336–2342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weedon MN, Owen KR, Shields B et al (2005) A large-scale association analysis of common variation of the HNF1α gene with type 2 diabetes in the U.K. Caucasian population. Diabetes 54:2487–2491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bonnycastle LL, Willer CJ, Conneely KN et al (2006) Common variants in Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young genes contribute to risk of type 2 diabetes in Finns. Diabetes 55:2534–2540PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Holmkvist J, Cervin C, Lyssenko V et al (2006) Common variants in HNF-1α and risk of type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 49:2882–2891PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Willer CJ, Bonnycastle LL, Conneely KN et al (2007) Screening of 134 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously associated with type 2 diabetes replicates association with 12 SNPs in nine genes. Diabetes 56:256–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McAteer J, Jablonski KA, Pollin TI et al (2007) Discovery of rare variants in MODY genes and impact on progression to diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP). ADA Annual Scientific Sessions Abstracts 392-OR. http://professional.diabetes.org/Abstracts_Display.aspx?TYP=1&CID=55551, accessed April 2008
  25. 25.
    Holmkvist J, Almgren P, Lyssenko V et al (2008) Common variants in MODY genes and future risk of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes (in press). DOI 10.2337/db06–1464
  26. 26.
    Winckler W, Weedon MN, Graham RR et al (2007) Evaluation of common variants in the six known Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY) genes for association with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 56:685–693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gudmundsson J, Sulem P, Steinthorsdottir V et al (2007) Two variants on chromosome 17 confer prostate cancer risk, and the one in TCF2 protects against type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 39:977–983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weedon MN, Clark VJ, Qian Y et al (2006) A common haplotype of the glucokinase gene alters fasting glucose and birth weight: association in six studies and population-genetics analyses. Am J Hum Genet 79:991–1001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kavvoura FK, Ioannidis JP (2005) Ala45Thr polymorphism of the NEUROD1 gene and diabetes susceptibility: a meta-analysis. Hum Genet 116:192–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Inoue H, Tanizawa Y, Wasson J et al (1998) A gene encoding a transmembrane protein is mutated in patients with diabetes mellitus and optic atrophy (Wolfram syndrome). Nat Genet 20:143–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hardy C, Khanim F, Torres R et al (1999) Clinical and molecular genetic analysis of 19 Wolfram syndrome kindreds demonstrating a wide spectrum of mutations in WFS1. Am J Hum Genet 65:1279–1290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sandhu MS, Weedon MN, Fawcett KA et al (2007) Common variants in WFS1 confer risk of type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 39:951–953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Franks PW, Rolandsson O, Debenham SL et al (2008) Replication of the association between variants in WFS1 and risk of type 2 diabetes in European populations. Diabetologia 51:458–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Florez JC, Jablonski KA, McAteer J et al (2008) Testing of diabetes-associated WFS1 polymorphisms in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetologia 51:451–457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aguilar-Bryan L, Bryan J (1999) Molecular biology of adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channels. Endocr Rev 20:101–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ashcroft FM, Gribble FM (1999) ATP-sensitive K+ channels and insulin secretion: their role in health and disease. Diabetologia 42:903–919PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Altshuler D, Hirschhorn JN, Klannemark M et al (2000) The common PPARγ Pro12Ala polymorphism is associated with decreased risk of type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 26:76–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sakura H, Wat N, Horton V, Millns H, Turner RC, Ashcroft FM (1996) Sequence variations in the human Kir6.2 gene, a subunit of the beta-cell ATP-sensitive K-channel: no association with NIDDM in white Caucasian subjects or evidence of abnormal function when expressed in vitro. Diabetologia 39:1233–1236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Inoue H, Ferrer J, Warren-Perry M et al (1997) Sequence variants in the pancreatic islet beta-cell inwardly rectifying K+ channel Kir6.2 (Bir) gene: identification and lack of role in Caucasian patients with NIDDM. Diabetes 46:502–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hansen L, Echwald SM, Hansen T, Urhammer SA, Clausen JO, Pedersen O (1997) Amino acid polymorphisms in the ATP-regulatable inward rectifier Kir6.2 and their relationships to glucose- and tolbutamide-induced insulin secretion, the insulin sensitivity index, and NIDDM. Diabetes 46:508–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hani EH, Boutin P, Durand E et al (1998) Missense mutations in the pancreatic islet beta cell inwardly rectifying K+ channel gene (KIR6.2/BIR): a meta-analysis suggests a role in the polygenic basis of type II diabetes mellitus in Caucasians. Diabetologia 41:1511–1515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gloyn AL, Hashim Y, Ashcroft SJ, Ashfield R, Wiltshire S, Turner RC (2001) Association studies of variants in promoter and coding regions of beta-cell ATP-sensitive K-channel genes SUR1 and Kir6.2 with type 2 diabetes mellitus (UKPDS 53). Diabet Med 18:206–212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gloyn AL, Weedon MN, Owen KR et al (2003) Large-scale association studies of variants in genes encoding the pancreatic beta-cell KATP channel subunits Kir6.2 (KCNJ11) and SUR1 (ABCC8) confirm that the KCNJ11 E23K variant is associated with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 52:568–572PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nielsen E-MD, Hansen L, Carstensen B et al (2003) The E23K variant of Kir6.2 associates with impaired post-OGTT serum insulin response and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 52:573–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Love-Gregory L, Wasson J, Lin J, Skolnick G, Suarez B, Permutt MA (2003) E23K single nucleotide polymorphism in the islet ATP-sensitive potassium channel gene (Kir6.2) contributes as much to the risk of type II diabetes in Caucasians as the PPARγ Pro12Ala variant. Diabetologia 46:136–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Florez JC, Burtt N, de Bakker PIW et al (2004) Haplotype structure and genotype-phenotype correlations of the sulfonylurea receptor and the islet ATP-sensitive potassium channel gene region. Diabetes 53:1360–1368PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    van Dam RM, Hoebee B, Seidell JC, Schaap MM, de Bruin TWA, Feskens EJM (2005) Common variants in the ATP-sensitive K+ channel genes KCNJ11 (Kir6.2) and ABCC8 (SUR1) in relation to glucose intolerance: population-based studies and meta-analyses. Diabet Med 22:590–598PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schwanstecher C, Meyer U, Schwanstecher M (2002) KIR6.2 polymorphism predisposes to type 2 diabetes by inducing overactivity of pancreatic β-cell ATP-sensitive K+ channels. Diabetes 51:875–879PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Riedel MJ, Boora P, Steckley D, de Vries G, Light PE (2003) Kir6.2 polymorphisms sensitize β-cell ATP-sensitive potassium channels to activation by acyl CoAs: A possible cellular mechanism for increased susceptibility to type 2 diabetes? Diabetes 52:2630–2635PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Riedel MJ, Light PE (2005) Saturated and cis/trans unsaturated acyl CoA esters differentially regulate wild-type and polymorphic β-cell ATP-sensitive K+ channels. Diabetes 54:2070–2079PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gloyn AL, Pearson ER, Antcliff JF et al (2004) Activating mutations in the gene encoding the ATP-sensitive potassium-channel subunit Kir6.2 and permanent neonatal diabetes. N Engl J Med 350:1838–1849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zeggini E, McCarthy MI (2007) TCF7L2: the biggest story in diabetes genetics since HLA? Diabetologia 50:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Grant SFA, Thorleifsson G, Reynisdottir I et al (2006) Variant of transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene confers risk of type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 38:320–323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cauchi S, El Achhab Y, Choquet H et al (2007) TCF7L2 is reproducibly associated with type 2 diabetes in various ethnic groups: a global meta-analysis. J Mol Med 85:777–782PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Florez JC (2007) The new type 2 diabetes gene TCF7L2. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 10:391–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Miyake K, Horikawa Y, Hara K et al (2008) Association of TCF7L2 polymorphisms with susceptibility to type 2 diabetes in 4,087 Japanese subjects. J Hum Genet 53:174–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chang YC, Chang TJ, Jiang YD et al (2007) Association study of the genetic polymorphisms of the transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene and type 2 diabetes in the Chinese population. Diabetes 56:2631–2637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Korinek V, Barker N, Moerer P et al (1998) Depletion of epithelial stem-cell compartments in the small intestine of mice lacking Tcf-4. Nat Genet 19:379–383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Drucker DJ (2007) The role of gut hormones in glucose homeostasis. J Clin Invest 117:24–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yi F, Brubaker PL, Jin T (2005) TCF-4 mediates cell type-specific regulation of proglucagon gene expression by β-catenin and glycogen synthase kinase-3β. J Biol Chem 280:1457–1464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Florez JC, Jablonski KA, Bayley N et al (2006) TCF7L2 polymorphisms and progression to diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program. N Engl J Med 355:241–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Saxena R, Gianniny L, Burtt NP et al (2006) Common single nucleotide polymorphisms in TCF7L2 are reproducibly associated with type 2 diabetes and reduce the insulin response to glucose in nondiabetic individuals. Diabetes 55:2890–2895PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Damcott CM, Pollin TI, Reinhart LJ et al (2006) Polymorphisms in the transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene are associated with type 2 diabetes in the Amish: Replication and evidence for a role in both insulin secretion and insulin resistance. Diabetes 55:2654–2659PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Munoz J, Lok KH, Gower BA et al (2006) Polymorphism in the transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene is associated with reduced insulin secretion in nondiabetic women. Diabetes 55:3630–3634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lyssenko V, Lupi R, Marchetti P et al (2007) Mechanisms by which common variants in the TCF7L2 gene increase risk of type 2 diabetes. J Clin Invest 117:2155–2163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Palmer ND, Lehtinen AB, Langefeld CD et al (2008) Association of TCF7L2 gene polymorphisms with reduced acute insulin response in Hispanic Americans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 93:304–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Schafer SA, Tschritter O, Machicao F et al (2007) Impaired glucagon-like peptide-1-induced insulin secretion in carriers of transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene polymorphisms. Diabetologia 50:2443–2450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Liu Z, Habener JF (2008) Glucagon-like peptide-1 activation of TCF7L2-dependent Wnt signaling enhances pancreatic beta cell proliferation. J Biol Chem 283:8723–8735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Shu L, Sauter NS, Schulthess FT, Matveyenko AV, Oberholzer J, Maedler K (2008) Transcription factor 7-like 2 regulates β-cell survival and function in human pancreatic islets. Diabetes 57:645–653PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Loos RJF, Franks PW, Francis RW et al (2007) TCF7L2 polymorphisms modulate proinsulin levels and β-cell function in a British Europid population. Diabetes 56:1943–1947PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Da Silva Xavier G, Rutter GA (2007) Tcf7l2 regulates glucose-stimulated insulin secretion and insulin gene expression in Min6 β-cells. ADA Annual Scientific Sessions Abstracts 1725-P. http://professional.diabetes.org/Abstracts_Display.aspx?TYP=1&CID=55224, accessed April 2008
  72. 72.
    Kirchhoff K, Machicao F, Haupt A et al (2008) Polymorphisms in the TCF7L2, CDKAL1 and SLC30A8 genes are associated with impaired proinsulin conversion. Diabetologia 51:597–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Wang J, Kuusisto J, Vanttinen M et al (2007) Variants of transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene predict conversion to type 2 diabetes in the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study and are associated with impaired glucose regulation and impaired insulin secretion. Diabetologia 50:1192–1200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Sladek R, Rocheleau G, Rung J et al (2007) A genome-wide association study identifies novel risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Nature 445:828–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Diabetes Genetics Initiative of Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Lund University and Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research (2007) Genome-wide association analysis identifies loci for type 2 diabetes and triglyceride levels. Science 316:1331–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Zeggini E, Weedon MN, Lindgren CM et al (2007) Replication of genome-wide association signals in U.K. samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science 316:1336–1341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Scott LJ, Mohlke KL, Bonnycastle LL et al (2007) A genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in Finns detects multiple susceptibility variants. Science 316:1341–1345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Steinthorsdottir V, Thorleifsson G, Reynisdottir I et al (2007) A variant in CDKAL1 influences insulin response and risk of type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 39:770–775PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Frayling TM, Timpson NJ, Weedon MN et al (2007) A common variant in the FTO gene is associated with body mass index and predisposes to childhood and adult obesity. Science 316:889–894PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Salonen JT, Uimari P, Aalto JM et al (2007) Type 2 diabetes whole-genome association study in four populations: the DiaGen consortium. Am J Hum Genet 81:338–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Hayes MG, Pluzhnikov A, Miyake K et al (2007) Identification of type 2 diabetes genes in Mexican Americans through genome-wide association studies. Diabetes 56:3033–3044PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Hanson RL, Bogardus C, Duggan D et al (2007) A search for variants associated with young-onset type 2 diabetes in American Indians in a 100K genotyping array. Diabetes 56:3045–3052PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Rampersaud E, Damcott CM, Fu M et al (2007) Identification of novel candidate genes for type 2 diabetes from a genome-wide association scan in the Old Order Amish: Evidence for replication from diabetes-related quantitative traits and from independent populations. Diabetes 56:3053–3062PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Florez JC, Manning AK, Dupuis J et al (2007) A 100 K genome-wide association scan for diabetes and related traits in the Framingham Heart Study: replication and integration with other genome-wide datasets. Diabetes 56:3063–3074PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Pascoe L, Tura A, Patel SK et al (2007) Common variants of the novel type 2 diabetes genes, CDKAL1 and HHEX/IDE, are associated with decreased pancreatic β-cell function. Diabetes 56:3101–3104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Grarup N, Rose CS, Andersson EA et al (2007) Studies of association of variants near the HHEX, CDKN2A/B and IGF2BP2 genes with type 2 diabetes and impaired insulin release in 10,705 Danish subjects: validation and extension of genome-wide association studies. Diabetes 56:3105–3111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Staiger H, Machicao F, Stefan N et al (2007) Polymorphisms within novel risk loci for type 2 diabetes determine beta-cell function. PLoS ONE 2:e832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Palmer ND, Goodarzi MO, Langefeld CD et al (2008) Quantitative trait analysis of T2D susceptibility loci identified from whole genome association studies in the IRAS Family Study. Diabetes 57:1093–1100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Taylor SI (1992) Lilly Lecture: molecular mechanisms of insulin resistance. Lessons from patients with mutations in the insulin-receptor gene. Diabetes 41:1473–1490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Panhuysen CIM, Cupples LA, Wilson PWF, Herbert AG, Myers RH, Meigs JB (2003) A genome scan for loci linked to quantitative insulin traits in persons without diabetes: the Framingham Offspring Study. Diabetologia 46:579–587PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Lyssenko V, Almgren P, Anevski D et al (2005) Genetic prediction of future type 2 diabetes. PLoS Med 2:e345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Vanttinen M, Nuutila P, Pihlajamaki J et al (2005) The effect of the Ala12 allele of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ2 gene on skeletal muscle glucose uptake depends on obesity: a positron emission tomography study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 90:4249–4254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Tonjes A, Scholz M, Loeffler M, Stumvoll M (2006) Association of Pro12Ala polymorphism in peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ with pre-diabetic phenotypes: meta-analysis of 57 studies on nondiabetic individuals. Diabetes Care 29:2489–2497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Florez JC, Jablonski KA, Sun MW et al (2007) Effects of the type 2 diabetes-associated PPARG P12A polymorphism on progression to diabetes and response to troglitazone. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 92:1502–1509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ludovico O, Pellegrini F, Di Paola R et al (2007) Heterogeneous effect of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ2 Ala12 variant on type 2 diabetes risk. Obesity 15:1076–1081PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Bochenski J, Placha G, Wanic K et al (2006) New polymorphism of ENPP1 (PC-1) is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes among obese individuals. Diabetes 55:2626–2630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Chandalia M, Grundy S, Adams-Huet B, Abate N (2007) Ethnic differences in the frequency of ENPP1/PC1 121Q genetic variant in the Dallas Heart Study cohort. J Diabetes Complicat 21:143–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    McAteer JB, Prudente S, Bacci S et al (2007) The ENPP1 K121Q polymorphism is associated with type 2 diabetes in European populations: Evidence from an updated meta-analysis in 42,042 subjects. Diabetes 57:1125–1130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Bacci S, De Cosmo S, Prudente S, Trischitta V (2007) ENPP1 gene, insulin resistance and related clinical outcomes. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 10:403–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Frayling TM (2007) Genome-wide association studies provide new insights into type 2 diabetes aetiology. Nat Rev Genet 8:657–662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Diabetes Unit and Center for Human Genetic ResearchMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA
  2. 2.Program in Medical and Population GeneticsBroad Institute of Harvard and MITCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Department of MedicineHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations