ArticlePloS one2024
Analysis of rare coding variants in 470,000 exome-sequenced subjects characterises contributions to risk of type 2 diabetes.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From omics to AI-mapping the pathogenic pathways in type 2 diabetes.FEBS letters · 2025Review
- Assessment of ability of a DNA language model to predict pathogenicity of rare coding variants.Journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Analysis of 470,000 exome-sequenced cases and controls fails to identify any genes impacting risk of developing affective disorder.Acta neuropsychiatrica · 2025Article
- Assessment of ability of AlphaMissense to identify variants affecting susceptibility to common disease.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo follow up results from an earlier study using an extended sample of 470,000 exome-sequenced subjects to identify genes associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and to characterise the distribution of rare variants in these genes. MATERIALS AND
methodsExome sequence data for 470,000 UK Biobank participants was analysed using a combined phenotype for T2D obtained from diagnostic and prescription data. Gene-wise weighted burden analysis of rare coding variants in the new cohort of 270,000 samples was carried out for the 32 genes previously significant with uncorrected p < 0.001 along with 7 other genes previously implicated in T2D. Follow-up studies of GCK, GIGYF1, HNF1A and HNF4A used the full sample of 470,000 to investigate the effects of different categories of variant.
resultsNo novel genes were identified as exome wide significant. Rare loss of function (LOF) variants in GCK exerted a very large effect on T2D risk but more common (though still very rare) nonsynonymous variants classified as probably damaging by PolyPhen on average approximately doubled risk. Rare variants in the other three genes also had large effects on risk.
conclusionsIn spite of the very large sample size, no novel genes are implicated. Coding variants with an identifiable effect are collectively too rare be generally useful for guiding treatment choices for most patients. The finding that some nonsynonymous variants in GCK affect T2D risk is novel but not unexpected and does not have obvious practical implications. This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.