• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Use of genomic panels to determine risk of developing type 2 diabetes in the general population: a targeted evidence-based review
【2h】

Use of genomic panels to determine risk of developing type 2 diabetes in the general population: a targeted evidence-based review

机译：基因组面板的使用确定一般人群中发育2型糖尿病的风险：基于目标的证据审查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This evidence review addresses whether type 2 diabetes genomic risk panels improve health outcomes (e.g., reduce rates of developing type 2 diabetes) in low- or high-risk adults; two clinical scenarios promulgated by commercial companies offering such testing. Evidence for the analytic validity of available genomic profiles was inadequate. Clinical validity ranged from inadequate to convincing for 30 variants identified on five type 2 diabetes genomic panels and by genome-wide association studies. Eight common variants were identified for general population use; evidence credibility based on published criteria was strong for two variants, moderate for two variants, and weak for four variants. TCF7L2 had the largest per-allele odds ratio of 1.39 (95% confidence interval 1.33–1.46). Models combining the best four, best eight, and all 30 variants used summary effect sizes, reported genotype frequencies, and assumed independent effects. Areas under the curve were 0.547, 0.551, and 0.570, respectively. In high-risk populations, per-allele odds ratios for TCF7L2 alone were similar to those of the general population. TCF7L2, in combination with other variants, yielded minimal improvement in risk reclassification. Evidence on TCF7L2 clinical validity was adequate. Three studies addressed the clinical utility of intervention effectiveness, stratified by TCF7L2 genotype; none found significant interactions. Clinical utility evidence was inadequate. In addition to analytic validity and clinical utility knowledge gaps, additional gaps were identified regarding how to inform, produce, and evaluate models combining multiple variants.
机译：这项证据综述探讨了2型糖尿病的基因组风险评估小组是否会改善低风险或高风险成年人的健康状况（例如，降低2型糖尿病的发生率）；商业公司提供此类测试的两种临床方案。现有基因组谱分析有效性的证据不足。临床有效性的范围从不足到令人信服，在五个5型2型糖尿病基因组研究中以及通过全基因组关联研究鉴定出的30个变体。确定了八种普通变体供一般人群使用；基于公开标准的证据可信度对于两个变体是强的，对于两个变体是中等的，对于四个变体是弱的。 TCF7L2的最大等位基因比值比为1.39（95％置信区间1.33–1.46）。结合了最佳四个，最佳八个和所有30个变体的模型使用了汇总效应大小，报告的基因型频率和假定的独立效应。曲线下的面积分别为0.547、0.551和0.570。在高风险人群中，仅TCF7L2的每等位基因比值比与普通人群相似。 TCF7L2与其他变体的组合在风险重新分类方面仅产生最小的改进。关于TCF7L2临床有效性的证据是足够的。根据TCF7L2基因型分层，三项研究针对干预有效性的临床应用。没有人发现明显的相互作用。临床实用证据不足。除了分析有效性和临床实用性知识方面的空白外，还发现了有关如何告知，生成和评估组合多个变体的模型的其他空白。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号