Dataset Information

Socioeconomic deprivation and genetic ancestry interact to modify type 2 diabetes ethnic disparities in the United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a complex common disease that disproportionately impacts minority ethnic groups in the United Kingdom (UK). Socioeconomic deprivation (SED) is widely considered as a potential explanation for T2D ethnic disparities in the UK, whereas the effect of genetic ancestry (GA) on such disparities has yet to be studied.

Methods

We leveraged data from the UK Biobank prospective cohort study, with participants enrolled between 2006 and 2010, to model the relationship between SED (Townsend index), GA (clustering principal components of whole genome genotype data), and T2D status (ICD-10 codes) across the three largest ethnic groups in the UK - Asian, Black, and White - using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

The Asian group shows the highest T2D prevalence (17·9%), followed by the Black (11·7%) and White (5·5%) ethnic groups. We find that both SED (OR: 1·11, 95% CI: 1·10-1·11) and non-European GA (OR South Asian versus European: 4·37, 95% CI: 4·10-4·66; OR African versus European: 2·52, 95% CI: 2·23-2·85) are significantly associated with the observed T2D disparities. GA and SED show significant interaction effects on T2D, with SED being a relatively greater risk factor for T2D for individuals with South Asian and African ancestry, compared to those with European ancestry.

Interpretation

The significant interactions between SED and GA underscore how the effects of environmental risk factors can differ among ancestry groups, suggesting the need for group-specific interventions.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Distinguished Scholars Program (DSP) to LMR and the Division of Intramural Research (DIR) of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) at NIH.

SUBMITTER: Nagar SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8343245 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies have evaluated whether the distribution of natural environments differs between marginalized and privileged neighborhoods. However, most studies restricted their analyses to a single or handful of cities and used different natural environment measures.ObjectivesWe evaluated whether natural environments are inequitably distributed based on socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity in the contiguous United States.MethodsWe obtained SES and race/ethnicity data (2015-2019) for all U.S. Census tracts. For each tract, we calculated the Normalized Different Vegetation Index (NDVI) for 2020, NatureScore (a proprietary measure of the quantity and quality of natural elements) for 2019, park cover for 2020, and blue space for 1984-2018. We used generalized additive models with adjustment for potential confounders and spatial autocorrelation to evaluate associations of SES and race/ethnicity with NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space in all tracts (n=71,532) and in urban tracts (n=45,338). To compare effect estimates, we standardized NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover so that beta coefficients presented a percentage increase or decrease of the standard deviation (SD).ResultsTracts with higher SES had higher NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space. For example, urban tracts in the highest median household income quintile had higher NDVI [44.8% of the SD (95% CI: 42.8, 46.8)] and park cover [16.2% of the SD (95% CI: 13.5, 19.0)] compared with urban tracts in the lowest median household income quintile. Across all tracts, a lower percentage of non-Hispanic White individuals and a higher percentage of Hispanic individuals were associated with lower NDVI and NatureScore. In urban tracts, we observed weak positive associations between percentage non-Hispanic Black and NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover; we did not find any clear associations for percentage Hispanics.DiscussionMultiple facets of the natural environment are inequitably distributed in the contiguous United States. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11164.