Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42396322

Disentangling adiposity-related and non-adiposity-related genetic pathways for type 2 diabetes.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify circulating proteins associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk through pathways not fully explained by body mass index (BMI), and to assess therapeutic actionability. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We applied GWAS-by-subtraction within a genomic structural equation model to European ancestry summary statistics for T2D (74,124 cases, 824,006 controls) and BMI (n = 681,275), partitioning T2D liability into BMI-related and BMI-subtracted components. We then performed proteome-wide Mendelian randomization (MR) using cis-protein quantitative trait loci from four plasma proteomics cohorts: ARIC, deCODE, Fenland, and the UK Biobank Pharma Proteomics Project. Prioritized proteins passed sensitivity analyses with alternative MR methods and were supported by colocalization evidence. Tissue-resolution regulatory support was assessed using cis-eQTL colocalization across GTEx and pancreatic islet, subcutaneous adipose, and whole-blood resources. Actionability was evaluated using the druggable genome and Open Targets. RESULTS: GWAS-by-subtraction attenuated the genetic correlation between BMI and BMI-subtracted T2D from 0.54 (SE 0.02) to 0.35 (SE 0.02). Proteome-wide MR prioritized 29 proteins for BMI-subtracted T2D. Thirteen showed eQTL colocalization in at least one tissue, implicating liver and intermediary metabolism (GCDH, NOTCH2), pancreatic islet biology (CTRB2, MANBA), adipose and Wnt signaling (RSPO3, GALNT3), and whole blood regulatory signals (PAM, SNUPN). Sixteen proteins were classified within druggable-genome Tiers 1-3, and five had existing Open Targets compounds. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating GWAS-by-subtraction, proteome-wide MR, and colocalization nominated 29 proteins associated with T2D liability not fully explained by BMI. These findings highlight genetically supported targets for follow-up studies of T2D therapies that complement weight-centered approaches.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Chen-Yang Su, Tianyuan Lu. 2026-06-22. Disentangling adiposity-related and non-adiposity-related genetic pathways for type 2 diabetes.. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.11.26355425

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article