Genome-wide linkage scans were carried out using a multipoint variance components method in white and black families of the NHLBI Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network (HyperGEN) study to identify quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for pancreatic β-cell function and insulin sensitivity estimated through the newly released nonlinear computer version of homeostasis model assessment 2. Participants fasting <8 h, with diagnosed type 2 diabetes, or taking blood glucose or blood lipid–lowering medications were excluded. Both phenotypes were adjusted separately by race and sex for the effects of age, BMI, and field center before linkage scans using 370 microsatellite markers were performed. A total of 685 white families (1,180 sibpairs) and 773 black families (775 sibpairs) were evaluated as well as subsets including 267 obese white families (757 sibpairs) and 427 obese black families (599 sibpairs) identified through tree-linkage analyses using interacting covariates of age, sex, and BMI. For β-cell function in the obese white families, significant (logarithm of odds [LOD] score >3.6) evidence supporting linkages was detected on chromosome 8q24 at D8S1179 (135 cM, LOD score 4.2, empirical P = 0.002) and at D8S1128 (140 cM, LOD score 3.7, empirical P = 0.003). In addition, two regions supported linkage for insulin sensitivity index in the obese black families on chromosome 7q11 at D7S3046 (79 cM, LOD score 3.0, empirical P = 0.018) and on chromosome 6q26 at D6S1277 (173 cM, LOD score 3.0, empirical P = 0.018). Reducing clinical heterogeneity using obesity data and improved estimates of β-cell function and insulin sensitivity may have permitted identification of a QTL on chromosome 8q24 for β-cell function in the presence of estimated insulin resistance and a QTL on chromosome 7q11 for insulin sensitivity. These regions replicate previous reports for type 2 diabetes–associated traits.

Defective pancreatic β-cell function (BCF) in the face of insulin resistance is a recognized hallmark of type 2 diabetes, where a β-cell defect prevents compensatory upregulation of insulin secretion (1). Quantitative estimates of BCF and insulin sensitivity may be obtained using well-established methods of stimulated euglycemic clamp and minimal model assessment. Less accurate methods, such as homeostasis model assessment (HOMA), also estimate BCF and insulin sensitivity. No single test is appropriate under all circumstances, but convenience and robustness make HOMA more appropriate for large population studies (2). The original model (HOMA1) was described in 1985 with a formula for approximate estimation (3). A more accurate nonlinear computer model (HOMA2) was described in 1998 (4), followed by the online release of a HOMA2 calculator in 2004 (www.OCDEM.ox.ac.uk). In view of its more precise physiological basis than that of HOMA1, HOMA2 is preferred (4) relative to the minimal model and other estimates (5).

Evidence of genetic components for BCF and insulin sensitivity has consistently been identified. Direct measures of glucose homeostasis using minimal model may have different genetic architecture versus the surrogate HOMA indexes (6). In recent years, a few genome-wide linkage scans of direct measures of glucose homeostasis became available in the FUSION (Finland-U.S. Investigation of Non–Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus Genetics) study (7), a hypertension and insulin resistance study in Hispanics (8), the HERITAGE (Health, Risk Factors, Exercise Training, and Genetics) Family Study (9,10), and the IRAS (Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study) Family Study (11). In contrast, HOMA1 indexes derived from fasting glucose and insulin have been more widely used in genome-wide linkage scans. These studies include a genome-wide linkage scan in the Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network (HyperGEN) study (12) and a meta-analysis in the Family Blood Pressure Program (FBPP), which is comprised of the HyperGEN and three other component networks (13). In the current study, based on the white and black HyperGEN samples, both BCF and insulin sensitivity were estimated using HOMA2. To identify quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for these nonlinear measures of HOMA, we carried out genome-wide linkage scans in the entire sample as well as in obese subsets of families identified through tree-linkage analyses using interacting covariates of age, sex, and BMI.

The HyperGEN study population, design, and methods were described in detail elsewhere (14). In brief, HyperGEN sampled white and black sibships containing sibpairs with essential hypertension, and family members were recruited from five participating clinical centers located in Framingham, Massachusetts; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Salt Lake City, Utah; Forsyth County, North Carolina; and Birmingham, Alabama; respectively. A sibship was ascertained if it had at least two siblings whose blood pressure was ≥140/90 mmHg or who used antihypertension medications, with an age at diagnosis of <60 years. Family relationships were confirmed using the marker data, and pedigree errors were corrected with unrelated individuals excluded from the study. Also excluded were those with fasting times <8 h; those with fasting glucose and insulin concentrations out of the range of 1–25 mmol/l and 1–2,200 pmol/l, respectively (5); those with diagnosed type 2 diabetes; and those on lipid or blood glucose–lowering medications. Additionally, a large random sample of unrelated individuals was recruited, regardless of hypertension status, from the same source population as the hypertensive sibling population. Allele frequencies were estimated separately in whites and blacks using marker allele frequencies derived from the randomly selected subgroup of whites and blacks. After covariate effect correction using the random sample as well as integration of marker information, a total of 971 subjects comprising 1,180 sibpairs from 685 white families and a total of 1,127 subjects comprising 775 sibpairs from 773 black families were available for the current analysis (Table 1). The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of each participating site, and written informed consent was obtained from each participant.

Pancreatic BCF and insulin sensitivity estimates were made available using the newly released HOMA2 calculator (35). Raw phenotypes were skewed and approximately normalized using a squared-root transformation for BCF and a log transformation for insulin resistance. The random setting of HyperGEN data was used for data adjustment procedures. Before genetic analysis, each phenotype was corrected for the effects of age, age2, age3, BMI, and field-center separately by sex within race in both the mean and the variance using a stepwise multiple regression procedure. For each of the regressions, only terms significant at the 5% level were retained. Outliers were defined as departures at least 4 SDs from the mean and at least 1 SD from the adjacent observation and set to “missing” in the current study. Finally, each of the adjusted variables was standardized (mean ± SD: 0 ± 1) separately by sex within race.

Morning fasting serum samples from all study subjects were collected in a resting state. Briefly, these samples were measured in duplicate for fasting serum glucose concentrations using Elan Glucose reagent and for fasting serum insulin concentrations on an automated immunoassay instrument with ultra-sensitive insulin kit from Beckman Coulter (Fullerton, CA) (15). Detailed measurement methods have been described elsewhere (12). For the glucose assay, the sensitive range is 2–450 mg/dl with the observed detection limit of 1.02 mg/dl. The sensitivity and dynamic range of the insulin assay are 0.03 and 0.03–300 mU/l, respectively, with 0 cross-reactivity with proinsulin and C-peptide, 30% with bovine insulin, and 97% with porcine insulin (12).

DNA was extracted from whole blood by standard methods at each of the four networks and was sent to the Mammalian Genotyping Service in Marshfield, Wisconsin (http://research.marshfieldclinic.org/genetics), for genotyping. In this study, a total of 370 highly polymorphic microsatellite markers were used, which has an average heterozygosity of 80%, an average intermarker spacing of 10 cM, and a 95% coverage of the entire human genome.

Multipoint linkage analyses were performed using the variance components model as implemented in the computer program SEGPATH (16,17). Under the variance components model, a phenotype is under the influence of the additive effects of a trait locus (g), a residual familial background modeled as a pseudo-polygenic component (GR), and a residual nonfamilial component (r). The effects of the trait locus and the pseudo-polygenic component on the phenotype are quantified by the heritabilities h2g and h2r, respectively. Allele-sharing probabilities at each marker location for each sibpair were estimated using the multipoint approach in the computer program MAPMAKER/SIBS (18) and were input to the SEGPATH model. Other parameters in the model include spouse resemblance (u), additional sibling resemblance (b), and the phenotype means and variances. The linkage hypothesis is tested by restricting h2g = 0. A likelihood ratio test contrasting the null versus the alternative hypotheses is asymptotically distributed as a 50:50 mixture of a χ2 with 1 d.f. (degree of freedom) and a point mass at 0 (19), and the LOD score is computed as χ2/(2 × loge10).

Aggregate samples may be subdivided into homogeneous subgroups, within some of which linkage signals may be enriched and power potentially enhanced in QTL mapping. Rapid assessment of the evidence can be accomplished by using Haseman-Elston regression model (20,21). A tree-based recursive partitioning method, based on interacting covariates, was used to identify such subgroups. It is implemented in SPLUS computer routine RPART (22), which has been modified for sibpair linkage analysis (23,24). At each step, sibpair data are partitioned into two mutually exclusive subgroups, which are determined by splitting the pool at the optimal cut point of the covariate observed in the sibpair that best partitions the linkage evidence. Also at each step, the Haseman-Elston regression is evaluated in each possible partition of the data for each eligible covariate. The split producing the greatest contrast in the Haseman-Elston regression slope is chosen. Further splits at each child node are evaluated recursively until a prespecified complexity is reached. The tree is then pruned back to minimize noise, eliminating splits where the residual sum of squares of the Haseman-Elston regression model is within 1 SE of that in the final step. Since genotype-covariate interactions provide the basis for the tree-linkage analysis to identify a linked subset of families, the identification of such a group can be considered as evidence for presence of such interactions.

Let Yi = (yi1Y)(yi2Y) be the “response” variable, where Y is the grand mean of the phenotype for the ith sibpair (i = 1,… , n) (21). In this model, yi = β0 + β1Mi + ε1, where Mi denotes the proportion of alleles at the marker shared identical-by-descent by the ith sibpair using MAPMAKER/SIBS (18) and the coefficient β1 indicates the strength of the linkage of the marker to the locus. The test of β1 = 0 is a test for absence of linkage. Covariate information on sibs must be interpreted at the level of sibpairs. Several different functions of the covariate values for the sibpair can be considered. They include, for example, the mean, minimum, and maximum for quantitative covariates and concordance and/or discordance for each outcome for qualitative covariates. To split a node, the model sum of squares is calculated for Y = β0 + β1Mi + β2MiI (Xj > cj) + β3MiI (Xjcj) over all covariates Xj and all cut points cj, where I(.) is the logical indicator function (1 if the expression is true and 0 if false). The covariate and its respective cut point leading to the smallest mean square error of the model are selected for splitting the sample. The algorithm is recursively applied to each child node obtained from the split. In the end, all terminal nodes of the tree are classified into the “linkage” group (the Haseman-Elston regression slopes β > 0, P < 0.05) and the remaining group. The identified sibpairs and the associated families from the linkage group can be analyzed further.

A false discovery rate (25) was used as a measure of global error for multiple testing simulations, i.e., the expected proportion of false rejections of the null hypothesis among the total number of rejections. False discovery rate for each trait was estimated separately by white and black data using the SAS package, and the associated empirical P values were reported in Table 2 for BCF and in Table 3 for insulin sensitivity.

Sample sizes and data characteristics for whites and blacks are given separately by sex in Table 1. In general, ∼70% of family members were diagnosed with essential hypertension, and ∼30% of subjects had pre-diabetes (fasting glucose 100–125 mg/dl) or suspected diabetes (fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl). The percentage of clinically defined obese subjects (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) was 42% in whites versus 57% in blacks. Overall, heritability estimates ranged from 30 to 60%, with higher estimates for BCF in whites and for insulin sensitivity in blacks. Promising regions supporting linkage (LOD scores >1.75) (26) from the multipoint genome-wide linkage scans include chromosomes 2q22 and 8q24 in whites and 7q11, 8p22, 12q24, and 13q12 in blacks for BCF. Details are given in Table 2 and also depicted in Fig. 1. Promising linkages for insulin sensitivity include chromosome 17q25 in whites and 6q26, 7q11, and 12q12 in blacks, and their complete results are given in Table 3 and Fig. 2. Tree-linkage analysis resulted in selected promising regions on chromosomes 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 13 that were similar to those from the obese families (but not exactly identical), leading to the identification of the obese subsample with BMI >33 kg/m2 (e.g., D8S1179, mean BMI >33.41, Haseman-Elston regression slope β = 1.15, P < 0.05; D13S787, mean BMI >34.73, β = 1.05, P < 0.05). Data characteristics of the tree-identified obese subgroup of families are given in Table 1, and promising linkages arising from the tree-identified obese subgroup of families are also given in Tables 2 and 3 with complete linkage scan results depicted in Figs. 1 and 2. In general, striking linkages with LOD scores ≥3.0 on chromosome 8q24 (79–91 cM) for BCF in obese whites and on chromosomes 7q11 (79–98 cM) and 6q26 (166–173 cM) for insulin sensitivity in blacks were observed.

Genome-wide linkage scans aimed at identifying QTLs for type 2 diabetes and its associated traits are accumulating. However, findings seldom replicate across studies. Because type 2 diabetes represents a complex disorder with substantial clinical and genetic heterogeneity, efforts to define and identify genetically homogeneous subsamples using clinical characteristics and pre-diabetes phenotypes, before the frank development of overt type 2 diabetes, may enhance gene discovery. These analyses in a biracial cohort of HyperGEN families are unique. First, this study is highly enriched with hypertensive subjects, offering a potentially more homogeneous sample (subphenotype) (13). Second, more precise estimates of BCF and insulin sensitivity from HOMA2 were used. Because concentration ranges have been set for fasting insulin (1–2,200 pmol/l) and glucose (1–25 mmol/l) (5), resulting in slightly reduced sample sizes by excluding some extreme values whose underlying genetic basis might be different, both BCF and insulin sensitivity appear to have been actually estimated in more homogeneous data settings. Finally, genome-wide linkage scans in obese families might further gene discovery because insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes frequently coexist with obesity, with or without hypertension (largely through underlying obesity) (27). The obese families in this study, including those with at least one family member whose BMI was >33 kg/m2, were identified through tree-linkage analysis using selected interacting covariates of age, sex, and BMI.

The linkage on chromosome 8q24 (135.1–139.5 cM) for BCF in whites was significant (LOD score >3.6) (18), with support of linkage evidence increased from LOD scores = 1.9 in the entire set of families to LOD score = 4.2 in the set of obese families. Though the linkage scan results for insulin sensitivity in the complete data were not impressive, modest support for linkage (LOD score = 1.4) at the same location was observed (Fig. 2A). Having such an observation is not surprising, since BCF and insulin sensitivity are recognized as associated traits. Clinically, β-cell dysfunction is an early feature of type 2 diabetes, while insulin resistance is a fundamental trigger for the development of type 2 diabetes (28). Compensatory BCF increase is often the initial β-cell response in the presence of insulin resistance, and according to the type 2 diabetes “2-hit” phenomenon proposed by Bergman et al. (1), insulin resistance is accompanied by a β-cell defect preventing compensatory upregulation of insulin secretion. In this study, the region supporting linkage for BCF in whites was not replicated in blacks. It should be noted that participants in the black families had more women and younger age, greater BMI, higher fasting insulin concentration (with compatible fasting glucose concentration), lower insulin sensitivity, and higher BCF than participants in the white families. In addition, genetic heterogeneity and clinical heterogeneity for this “pre-diabetes phenotype” could in part account for the difficulty in replicating linkage evidence across races. Thus, this identified region on chromosome 8q24 for BCF observed in the obese hypertensive families may be population-specific to whites, with a different (or overlapping) set of genes contributing to variation in BCF in blacks.

Genome-wide linkage scans of stimulated insulin sensitivity and BCF parameters using euglycemic clamp (8) or minimal model assessment (7,911) have been recently reported. However, the genetic basis of these parameters is likely to be different from the basal surrogate estimates through HOMA (6). Linkage scans using the HOMA2 (45) estimates have not been reported. Most recently, a genome-wide linkage scan of HOMA1 insulin resistance index in the HyperGEN (12) and a meta-analysis in the FBPP (13) did not reveal promising linkage evidence at this location. The region of interest in our study (chromosome 8q24) has been shown to be linked to type 2 diabetes in a U.K. population (D8S284, 143.82 cM) (29), to type 1 diabetes in a Dutch population (D8S1128, 139.53 cM) (30), to unesterified HDL cholesterol in Mexican Americans (D8S1128) (31), to LDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B-100 in sedentary whites (D8S1774, 137.9 cM) (32), and to systolic blood pressure in sedentary blacks (D8S1179, 135.1 cM) (33). No prominent candidate genes at this locus have been proposed, but these clusters of associated linkage results across studies and populations suggest the presence of at least one QTL of relevance to phenotypes of the metabolic syndrome.

Chromosomes 7q11 (78–91 cM) and 6q26 (166–173 cM) are two regions supporting linkage for insulin sensitivity in both the entire family collection and in the obese black families. Promising linkages for BCF was also observed at the same region in the obese white families (Fig. 1B). In addition, we observed that mean insulin sensitivity in the black families was noticeably lower than that in the white families (Table 1), implying that blacks are more insulin resistant. The linkage on chromosome 7q11 has been replicated in several other studies (13). The glycogen-associated regulatory subunit of type 1 protein phosphatase (PPP1R3) gene resides in this region. This gene product binds to muscle glycogen with high affinity, thereby enhancing dephosphorylation of glycogen-bound substrates for protein phosphatase-1 such as glycogen synthase and glycogen phosphorylase kinase (OMIM 600917). Consistently, this gene product has been associated with insulin sensitivity (34) and severe insulin resistance, glycemia variation, and type 2 diabetes (3537). Two previous studies have also observed linkage near the paraoxonase (PON) gene locus for disposition index exercise training response (109 cM, LOD score = 1.4) in the HERITAGE Family Study (10) and for type 2 diabetes (114 cM, Z score = 1.9) in Pima Indians (38). The region of linkage insulin sensitivity as estimated by HOMA2 appears to be different from those for the insulin resistance index estimated by HOMA1 (found at more distal locations of the long arm, 182 cM, LOD score = 1.7) in a recent scan in the HyperGEN (12) and in a meta-analysis (163–174 cM, LOD scores = 2.6–3.2) in the FBPP (13). HOMA2 requires fasting insulin and glucose concentrations within ranges of 1–2,200 pmol/l and 1–25 mmol/l, respectively. The HOMA2 results in slightly reduced sample sizes but likely better estimates from a more homogeneous sample. As for the locus on chromosome 6q26, a recent linkage scan in a Hong Kong Chinese population mapped HOMA1 insulin resistance index at 119 cM (LOD score = 3.0) (39), seemingly a different locus from our current insulin sensitivity linkage peak in obese blacks. For type 2 diabetes and associated trait loci around this region (166–173 cM), linkage evidence has been obtained in African Americans for type 2 diabetes (40), in African Americans in the FBPP (41), and in a meta-analysis of six linkage scans (42) for hypertension. There is growing interest in assessing whether this locus harbors pleiotropic genes for type 2 diabetes, obesity, and hypertension with interactions among these genes and complex diseases appropriately measured in future genetic studies. Replications by other independent studies and fine-scale mappings on both chromosomes 7q11 and 6q26 for insulin sensitivity or insulin resistance are clearly warranted.

In conclusion, pancreatic BCF and insulin sensitivity estimated through HOMA2 were explored for the first time in multipoint variance component genome-wide linkage scans. Based on the linkage evidence in obese and hypertensive nondiabetic families, the QTLs on chromosomes 8q24 and 7q11, which are located in regions previously identified as harboring type 2 diabetes–associated genes, may govern insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion in the presence of insulin resistance before development of overt type 2 diabetes. Follow-up fine-scale mapping around these loci and well-designed candidate gene studies, in particular, are strongly encouraged.

FIG. 1.

Genome-wide linkage scan results for BCF in overall (solid line) and obese (dashed line) whites (A) and blacks (B). LOD score of the reference line is 1.75 for promising linkages.

FIG. 1.

Genome-wide linkage scan results for BCF in overall (solid line) and obese (dashed line) whites (A) and blacks (B). LOD score of the reference line is 1.75 for promising linkages.

FIG. 2.

Genome-wide linkage scan results for insulin sensitivity in overall (solid line) and obese (dashed line) whites (A) and blacks (B). LOD score of the reference line is 1.75 for promising linkages.

FIG. 2.

Genome-wide linkage scan results for insulin sensitivity in overall (solid line) and obese (dashed line) whites (A) and blacks (B). LOD score of the reference line is 1.75 for promising linkages.

TABLE 1

Sample characteristics for overall and obese white and black families

nAge (years)BMI (kg/m2)Glucose (mg/dl)Insulin (μU/ml)BCF (%)Insulin sensitivity (%)
Whites        
    Overall        
        Men 451 54.2 ± 0.7 29.3 ± 0.2 97.9 ± 0.6 8.6 ± 0.3 84.9 ± 1.5 117.3 ± 2.7 
        Women 520 55.4 ± 0.6 30.1 ± 0.3 95.9 ± 0.6 8.3 ± 0.2 87.2 ± 1.5 122.7 ± 2.7 
    Obese        
        Men 244 51.9 ± 0.9 30.9 ± 0.3 98.4 ± 0.8 9.7 ± 0.4 90.4 ± 2.3 108.2 ± 3.7 
        Women 308 53.3 ± 0.7 32.8 ± 0.5 96.0 ± 0.9 9.5 ± 0.4 93.0 ± 2.0 111.9 ± 3.4 
Blacks        
    Overall        
        Men 375 46.2 ± 0.7 30.1 ± 0.3 97.8 ± 0.9 9.4 ± 0.3 91.0 ± 2.0 113.0 ± 3.1 
        Women 752 45.7 ± 0.5 33.5 ± 0.3 95.3 ± 0.7 10.9 ± 0.3 107.5 ± 1.5 95.9 ± 1.9 
    Obese        
        Men 257 45.1 ± 0.8 31.5 ± 0.4 98.0 ± 1.1 10.1 ± 0.4 95.8 ± 2.5 105.5 ± 3.6 
        Women 551 44.8 ± 0.5 35.5 ± 0.3 96.2 ± 0.8 11.7 ± 0.3 111.4 ± 1.8 88.9 ± 2.1 
nAge (years)BMI (kg/m2)Glucose (mg/dl)Insulin (μU/ml)BCF (%)Insulin sensitivity (%)
Whites        
    Overall        
        Men 451 54.2 ± 0.7 29.3 ± 0.2 97.9 ± 0.6 8.6 ± 0.3 84.9 ± 1.5 117.3 ± 2.7 
        Women 520 55.4 ± 0.6 30.1 ± 0.3 95.9 ± 0.6 8.3 ± 0.2 87.2 ± 1.5 122.7 ± 2.7 
    Obese        
        Men 244 51.9 ± 0.9 30.9 ± 0.3 98.4 ± 0.8 9.7 ± 0.4 90.4 ± 2.3 108.2 ± 3.7 
        Women 308 53.3 ± 0.7 32.8 ± 0.5 96.0 ± 0.9 9.5 ± 0.4 93.0 ± 2.0 111.9 ± 3.4 
Blacks        
    Overall        
        Men 375 46.2 ± 0.7 30.1 ± 0.3 97.8 ± 0.9 9.4 ± 0.3 91.0 ± 2.0 113.0 ± 3.1 
        Women 752 45.7 ± 0.5 33.5 ± 0.3 95.3 ± 0.7 10.9 ± 0.3 107.5 ± 1.5 95.9 ± 1.9 
    Obese        
        Men 257 45.1 ± 0.8 31.5 ± 0.4 98.0 ± 1.1 10.1 ± 0.4 95.8 ± 2.5 105.5 ± 3.6 
        Women 551 44.8 ± 0.5 35.5 ± 0.3 96.2 ± 0.8 11.7 ± 0.3 111.4 ± 1.8 88.9 ± 2.1 

Data are means ± SE.

TABLE 2

Promising (LOD scores >1.75) multipoint genome-wide linkage scan results for BCF

ChromosomeLocation (cM)MarkerLOD scorePEmpirical P
Whites 2q22 86.82 D2S1799 2.10 0.001 0.188 
 8q24 135.08 D8S1179 1.90 0.002 0.188 
Blacks 7q11 90.95 D7S2204 1.77 0.002 0.127 
 8p22 26.43 D8S1106 2.29 0.001 0.106 
 12q24 125.31 D12S2070 2.00 0.001 0.106 
 13q12 8.87 D13S787 1.93 0.001 0.106 
Obese whites 8q24 135.08 D8S1179 4.20 0.000 0.002 
ChromosomeLocation (cM)MarkerLOD scorePEmpirical P
Whites 2q22 86.82 D2S1799 2.10 0.001 0.188 
 8q24 135.08 D8S1179 1.90 0.002 0.188 
Blacks 7q11 90.95 D7S2204 1.77 0.002 0.127 
 8p22 26.43 D8S1106 2.29 0.001 0.106 
 12q24 125.31 D12S2070 2.00 0.001 0.106 
 13q12 8.87 D13S787 1.93 0.001 0.106 
Obese whites 8q24 135.08 D8S1179 4.20 0.000 0.002 
TABLE 3

Promising (LOD scores >1.75) multipoint genome-wide linkage scan results for insulin sensitivity

ChromosomeLocation (cM)MarkerLOD scorePEmpirical P
Whites 17q25 116.86 D7S784 1.74 0.002 0.576 
Blacks 6q26 173.31 D6S1277 2.81 0.000 0.059 
 7q11 78.65 D7S3046 2.11 0.001 0.165 
 12q12 56.25 D12S1301 1.76 0.002 0.165 
Obese blacks 2q35 215.78 D2S434 2.03 0.001 0.058 
 6q26 173.31 D6S1277 2.99 0.000 0.018 
 7q11 78.65 D7S3046 3.01 0.000 0.018 
 9q32 120.04 D9S930 2.32 0.001 0.040 
 12q12 56.25 D12S1301 2.86 0.000 0.018 
ChromosomeLocation (cM)MarkerLOD scorePEmpirical P
Whites 17q25 116.86 D7S784 1.74 0.002 0.576 
Blacks 6q26 173.31 D6S1277 2.81 0.000 0.059 
 7q11 78.65 D7S3046 2.11 0.001 0.165 
 12q12 56.25 D12S1301 1.76 0.002 0.165 
Obese blacks 2q35 215.78 D2S434 2.03 0.001 0.058 
 6q26 173.31 D6S1277 2.99 0.000 0.018 
 7q11 78.65 D7S3046 3.01 0.000 0.018 
 9q32 120.04 D9S930 2.32 0.001 0.040 
 12q12 56.25 D12S1301 2.86 0.000 0.018 

This hypertension network is funded by cooperative agreements (U10) with NHLBI (HL54471, HL54472, HL54473, HL54495, HL54496, HL54497, HL54509, and HL54515).

We acknowledge the participants of the HyperGEN study and the Participating Institutions and Principal Staff (http://www.biostat.wustl.edu/hypergen/Acknowledge.html).

1.
Bergman RN, Ader M, Huecking K, Van Citters G: Accurate assessment of β-cell function: the hyperbolic correction.
Diabetes
51 (Suppl. 1)
:
S212
–220,
2002
2.
Wallace TM, Matthews DR: The assessment of insulin resistance in man.
Diabet Med
19
:
527
–534,
2002
3.
Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, Naylor BA, Treacher DF, Turner RC: Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and beta-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man.
Diabetologia
28
:
412
–419,
1985
4.
Levy JC, Matthews DR, Hermans MP: Correct homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) evaluation uses the computer program (Letter).
Diabetes Care
21
:
2191
–2192,
1998
5.
Wallace TM, Levy JC, Matthews DR: Use and abuse of HOMA modeling.
Diabetes Care
27
:
1487
–1495,
2004
6.
Bergman RN, Zaccaro DJ, Watanabe RM, Haffner SM, Saad MF, Norris JM, Wagenknecht LE, Hokanson JE, Rotter JI, Rich SS: Minimal model–based insulin sensitivity has greater heritability and a different genetic basis than homeostasis model assessment or fasting insulin.
Diabetes
52
:
2168
–2174,
2003
7.
Watanabe RM, Ghosh S, Langefeld CD, Valle TT, Hauser ER, Magnuson VL, Mohlke KL, Silander K, Ally DS, Chines P, Blaschak-Harvan J, Douglas JA, Duren WL, Epstein MP, Fingerlin TE, Kaleta HS, Lange EM, Li C, McEachin RC, Stringham HM, Trager E, White PP, Balow J Jr, Birznieks G, Chang J, Eldridge W: The Finland-United States investigation of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus genetics (FUSION) study. II. An autosomal genome scan for diabetes-related quantitative-trait loci.
Am J Hum Genet
67
:
1186
–1200,
2000
8.
Cheng LS, Davis RC, Raffel LJ, Xiang AH, Wang N, Quinones M, Wen PZ, Toscano E, Diaz J, Pressman S, Henderson PC, Azen SP, Hsueh WA, Buchanan TA, Rotter JI: Coincident linkage of fasting plasma insulin and blood pressure to chromosome 7q in hypertensive Hispanic families.
Circulation
104
:
1255
–1260,
2001
9.
An P, Hong Y, Weisnagel SJ, Rice T, Rankinen T, Leon AS, Skinner JS, Wilmore JH, Chagnon YC, Bergman RN, Bouchard C, Rao DC: Genomic scan of glucose and insulin metabolism phenotypes: the HERITAGE Family Study.
Metabolism
52
:
246
–253,
2003
10.
An P, Teran-Garcia M, Rice T, Rankinen T, Weisnagel SJ, Bergman RN, Boston RC, Mandel S, Stefanovski D, Leon AS, Skinner JS, Rao DC, Bouchard C: Genome-wide linkage scans for pre-diabetes phenotypes in response to 20 weeks of endurance exercise-training in non-diabetic whites and blacks: the HERITAGE Family Study.
Diabetologia
48
:
1142
–1149,
2005
11.
Rich SS, Bowden DW, Haffner SM, Norris JM, Saad MF, Mitchell BD, Rotter JI, Langefeld CD, Wagenknecht LE, Bergman RN: Identification of quantitative trait loci for glucose homeostasis: the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study (IRAS) Family Study.
Diabetes
53
:
1866
–1875,
2004
12.
Freedman BI, Rich SS, Sale MM, Heiss G, Djousse L, Pankow JS, Province MA, Rao DC, Lewis CE, Chen YD, Beck SR, the HyperGEN Investigators: Genome-wide scans for heritability of fasting serum insulin and glucose concentrations in hypertensive families.
Diabetologia
48
:
661
–668,
2005
13.
An P, Freedman BI, Hanis CL, Chen YD, Weder AB, Schork NJ, Boerwinkle E, Province MA, Hsiung CA, Wu X, Quertermous T, Rao DC: Genome-wide linkage scans for fasting glucose, insulin, and insulin resistance in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Family Blood Pressure Program: evidence of linkages to chromosome 7q36 and 19q13 from meta-analysis.
Diabetes
54
:
909
–914,
2005
14.
Williams RR, Rao DC, Ellison RC, Arnett DK, Heiss G, Oberman A, Eckfeldt JH, Leppert MF, Province MA, Mockrin SC, Hunt SC: NHLBI family blood pressure program: methodology and recruitment in the HyperGEN network: Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology network.
Ann Epidemiol
10
:
389
–400,
2000
15.
Allauzen S, Mani JC, Granier C, Pau B, Bouanani M: Epitope mapping and binding analysis of insulin-specific monoclonal antibodies using a biosensor approach.
J Immunol Methods
183
:
27
–32,
1995
16.
Province MA, Rao DC: A general purpose model and a computer program for combined segregation and path (SEGPATH): automatically creating computer program from symbolic language model specifications.
Genet Epidemiol
12
:
203
–219,
1995
17.
Province MA, Rice T, Borecki IB, Gu C, Kraja A, Rao DC: A multivariate and multilocus variance components approach using structural relationships to assess quantitative trait linkage via SEGPATH.
Genet Epidemiol
24
:
128
–138,
2003
18.
Kruglyak L, Lander ES: Complete multipoint sib-pair analysis of qualitative and quantitative traits.
Am J Hum Genet
57
:
439
–454,
1995
19.
Self SG, Liang KY: Asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators and likelihood ratio tests under nonstandard conditions.
J Am Stat Assoc
82
:
605
–610,
1987
20.
Haseman JK, Elston RC: The investigation of linkage between a quantitative trait and a marker locus.
Behav Genet
2
:
3
–19,
1972
21.
Elston RC, Buxbaum S, Jacobs KB, Olson JM: Haseman and Elston revisited.
Genet Epidemiol
19
:
1
–17,
2000
22.
Therneau TM, Atkinson EJ: Technical Report no. 61,
An Introduction to Recursive Partitioning Using the RPART Routines.
Rochester, Minnesota, Mayo Clinic,
1997
23.
Shannon WD, Province MA, Rao DC: Tree-based recursive partitioning methods for subdividing sibpairs into relatively more homogeneous subgroups.
Genet Epidemiol
20
:
293
–306,
2001
24.
Province MA, Shannon WD, Rao DC: Classification methods for confronting heterogeneity.
Adv Genet
42
:
273
–286,
2001
25.
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y: Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing.
J R Stat Soc B
85
:
289
–300,
1995
26.
Rao DC, Province MA: The future of path analysis, and combined models for genetic dissection of complex traits.
Hum Genet
50
:
34
–42,
2000
27.
Kaplan NM: Hypertension and diabetes. In
Ellenberg & Rifkin’s Diabetes Mellitus
. 6th ed. Port D, Sherwin RS, Baron A, Eds. New York, McGraw-Hill Medical Publishing,
2003
, p.
815
28.
Matthews DR: Insulin resistance and β-cell function: a clinical perspective.
Diabetes Obes Metab
3 (Suppl. 1)
:
S28
–S33,
2001
29.
Wiltshire S, Hattersley AT, Hitman GA, Walker M, Levy JC, Sampson M, O’Rahilly S, Frayling TM, Bell JI, Lathrop GM, Bennett A, Dhillon R, Fletcher C, Groves CJ, Jones E, Prestwich P, Simecek N, Rao PV, Wishart M, Bottazzo GF, Foxon R, Howell S, Smedley D, Cardon LR, Menzel S, McCarthy MI: A genomewide scan for loci predisposing to type 2 diabetes in a U.K. population (the Diabetes UK Warren 2 Repository): analysis of 573 pedigrees provides independent replication of a susceptibility locus on chromosome 1q.
Am J Hum Genet
69
:
553
–569,
2001
30.
Vaessen N, Heutink P, Houwing-Duistermaat JJ, Snijders PJ, Rademaker T, Testers L, Batstra MR, Sandkuijl LA, van Duijn CM, Oostra BA: A genome-wide search for linkage-disequilibrium with type 1 diabetes in a recent genetically isolated population from the Netherlands.
Diabetes
51
:
856
–859,
2002
31.
Almasy L, Hixson JE, Rainwater DL, Cole S, Williams JT, Mahaney MC, VandeBerg JL, Stern MP, MacCluer JW, Blangero J: Human pedigree-based quantitative-trait-locus mapping: localization of two genes influencing HDL-cholesterol metabolism.
Am J Hum Genet
64
:
1686
–1693,
1999
32.
Feitosa MF, Borecki IB, Rankinen T, Rice T, Despres JP, Chagnon YC, Gagnon J, Leon AS, Skinner JS, Bouchard C, Province MA, Rao DC: Evidence of QTLs on chromosomes 1q42 and 8q24 for LDL-cholesterol and apoB levels in the HERITAGE family study.
J Lipid Res
46
:
281
–286,
2005
33.
Rice T, Rankinen T, Chagnon YC, Province MA, Perusse L, Leon AS, Skinner JS, Wilmore JH, Bouchard C, Rao DC: Genomewide linkage scan of resting blood pressure: HERITAGE Family Study.
Hypertension
39
:
1037
–1043,
2002
34.
Hansen L, Reneland R, Berglund L, Rasmussen SK, Hansen T, Lithell H, Pedersen O: Polymorphism in the glycogen-associated regulatory subunit of type 1 protein phosphatase (PPP1R3) gene and insulin sensitivity.
Diabetes
49
:
298
–301,
2000
35.
Hansen L, Hansen T, Vestergaard H, Bjorbaek C, Echwald SM, Clausen JO, Chen YH, Chen MX, Cohen PT, Pedersen O: A widespread amino acid polymorphism at codon 905 of the glycogen-associated regulatory subunit of protein phosphatase-1 is associated with insulin resistance and hypersecretion of insulin.
Hum Mol Genet
4
:
1313
–1320,
1995
36.
Hegele RA, Harris SB, Zinman B, Wang J, Cao H, Hanley AJ, Tsui LC, Scherer SW: Variation in the AU(AT)-rich element within the 3′-untranslated region of PPP1R3 is associated with variation in plasma glucose in aboriginal Canadians.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
83
:
3980
–3983,
1998
37.
Savage DB, Agostini M, Barroso I, Gurnell M, Luan J, Meirhaeghe A, Harding AH, Ihrke G, Rajanayagam O, Soos MA, George S, Berger D, Thomas EL, Bell JD, Meeran K, Ross RJ, Vidal-Puig A, Wareham NJ, O’Rahilly S, Chatterjee VK, Schafer AJ: Digenic inheritance of severe insulin resistance in a human pedigree.
Nat Genet
31
:
379
–384,
2002
38.
Hanson RL, Ehm MG, Pettitt DJ, Prochazka M, Thompson DB, Timberlake D, Foroud T, Kobes S, Baier L, Burns DK, Almasy L, Blangero J, Garvey WT, Bennett PH, Knowler WC: An autosomal genomic scan for loci linked to type II diabetes mellitus and body-mass index in Pima Indians.
Am J Hum Genet
63
:
1130
–1138,
1998
39.
Ng MC, So WY, Lam VK, Cockram CS, Bell GI, Cox NJ, Chan JC: Genome-wide scan for metabolic syndrome and related quantitative traits in Hong Kong Chinese and confirmation of a susceptibility locus on chromosome 1q21–q25.
Diabetes
53
:
2676
–2683,
2004
40.
Sale MM, Freedman BI, Langefeld CD, Williams AH, Hicks PJ, Colicigno CJ, Beck SR, Brown WM, Rich SS, Bowden DW: A genome-wide scan for type 2 diabetes in African-American families reveals evidence for a locus on chromosome 6q.
Diabetes
53
:
830
–837,
2004
41.
Zhu X, Luke A, Cooper RS, Quertermous T, Hanis C, Mosley T, Gu CC, Tang H, Rao DC, Risch N, Weder A: Admixture mapping for hypertension loci with genome-scan markers.
Nat Genet
37
:
177
–181,
2005
42.
Liu W, Zhao W, Chase GA: Genome scan meta-analysis for hypertension.
Am J Hypertens
17
:
1100
–1106,
2004