Introduction
The existence of elevated glucose tolerance levels for the first time during the second or third trimesters of pregnancy is characterized as gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).1 Alternatively, it can be defined as glucose or carbohydrate intolerances that are detected for the first time during the pregnancy in the women’s life.2 The earlier GDM was diagnosed prior to or at 20th week of gestation, while late GDM was detected during 24–28 weeks of the gestation period in the pregnant women.3,4 Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is one of the life time risk factor developed by the GDM women in the future and has the potential to be inherited to their offspring in future.5 GDM women include advanced maternal age, previous history of GDM, family histories containing both T2DM and GDM as non-modified risk factors, while weight management, balanced diet, and regular physical activity are modified risk factors.6 Obesity is considered as one of the major risk factors for the development of GDM in Saudi Arabia7 as it alters the adipokine secretion and further leads to insulin resistance; which is definitely associated between diabetes and obesity.8 The prevalence of obesity in Saudi women was ~41%.9 The diagnosed GDM women will require lifestyle intervention modifications such as diet and physical activity, metformin as Rx and regular dietary supplements such as probiotics, inositol, and myoinositol that can promote weight loss or either improve insulin sensitivity.10
T2DM and GDM share the similar pathophysiological characteristics, precisely impaired insulin sensitivity and β-cell dysfunction.11,12 Furthermore, GDM is believed to be equivalent to T2DM in terms of pathogenic mechanism, including insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction.13 The prevalence of T2DM is also parallelly growing in the Saudi population, and ethnicity plays an important role in contributing to each and every risk factor, even though their incidence varies among various population groups. The 19.6% of GDM prevalence was confirmed and documented in Saudi women.7
The diagnosis of GDM is confirmed via oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), which was carried out between the later second and earlier third trimesters, ie, during 24–28 weeks of the gestation period in the pregnant women.14 A 75-g OGTT diagnostic criteria by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) protocol will be followed by the outpatient clinic of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at King Khalid University Hospitals (KKUH) in Saudi Arabia’s capital city.
Sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) acts as an insulin sensor that helps regulate body weight and enhance insulin levels in skeletal muscle and adipose tissues. Additionally, it promotes insulin secretion and improves insulin sensitivity. With its histone deacetylase function on various substrates, SIRT1 plays a crucial role in regulating glucose and lipid metabolism. SIRT1 plays a critical role in regulating insulin signaling by enhancing insulin secretion in pancreatic β-cells.15 Previous research has established that certain variants in the SIRT1 gene play a role in developing visceral obesity, which can subsequently increase the risk of diabetes, precisely T2DM.16–19 T2DM and GDM both have similar pathophysiological features, including peripheral insulin resistance and a lack of β-cell production in the pancreas. The SIRT1 gene is crucial in maintaining glucose balance and insulin sensitivity throughout pregnancy, which can affect glucose tolerance and increase the risk of GDM.20 The q21.3 locus on the 10th chromosome in SIRT1 gene, which consists of 11 exons.21
Numerous global studies have been conducted and documented regarding SIRT1 SNPs studied in different forms of diabetes related diseases.15,22–27 However, limited studies have documented GDM women with SNPs present in SIRT1 gene.26,27 None of the studies addressed the combinational relationship between SIRT1 gene and GDM women in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, this study was designed to screen the rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs present in the SIRT1 gene in Saudi women diseases with GDM.
Methods
Ethical Aspects
The ethical approval was received from the Institutional Review Board in the College of Medicine at King Saud University in 2023. All the pregnant women had signed the patient consent form, and next, women’s anthropometric, baseline, family histories, and peripheral blood were collected. This study was carried out as per the norms of the Helsinki Declaration.
Sample Size Formula
In this study, a sample size calculation formula mentioned below was used to calculate the sample size for each group.
Where,
Zα = Z value for α level
Zβ = Z value for β level
p = average percentage between two groups
q = 100-p
d = clinically meaningful difference between two groups.
Based on our previous work, we recruited 120 GDM and 120 non-GDM women using nMaster software to calculate the sample size. These GDM and non-GDM samples were adapted from Ali Khan et al28 work, and this current study was designed to focus on the SNPs reported in SIRT1 gene, which is different from earlier published work.
Involvement of Saudi Pregnant Women
The pregnant women were enrolled in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at King Khalid University Hospital (KKUH). Altogether, 240 pregnant women were enrolled in this case-control study with equal number of cases and controls. The screening of GDM was confirmed in the 2nd trimester of the pregnancy, ie, between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation in the KKUH premises. The diagnosis of the GDM was confirmed using 75 g of OGTT. Prior to performance of 75 g OGTT test, all the pregnant women were recommended for overnight fasting or at least 8 hours after the sun set. Next day, fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels were measured, and then 75 g of OGTT test was carried out by collecting serum samples from 1st and 2nd hours to measure the glucose levels. The normal threshold levels for FBG, 1st and 2nd hours of OGTT levels were ≥5.1 mmol/L, ≥10.0 mmol/L, and ≥8.5mmol/L. During the screening of the glucose levels, controls (non-GDM) will be considered if the pregnant women had all the normal levels for three different types of serum analysis, ie, FBG, OGTT-1h, and OGTT-2h tests. If any one of the pregnant women meet or surpass the glucose levels for FBG, OGTT-1h and OGTT-2h tests during their pregnancy, then they are considered as GDM. The inclusion criteria for the selection of GDM women are based on screening at KKUH between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation age, Saudi nationality, and were not on medication diagnosed with other human diseases. The pregnant women who were already diabetes, non-Saudi nationality and confirmed GDM outside the KKUH were excluded from this study.28
Anthropometric Measurements and Sample Collection
Anthropometric measurements such as age, weight, BMI, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were started to be recorded on every visit to KKUH after the confirmation of their pregnancies. However, we recorded the anthropometric measurements after the completion of OGTT tests and diagnosed the women as either GDM or non-GDM. Based on documented protocols such as AAMI/ESH/ISO, HTN levels were used for this study.29 Apart from this, 5 mL of peripheral blood was collected and bifurcated as serum (3 mL) and anticoagulant blood (2 mL). The serum sample was used for a panel of lipid profile analysis, and EDTA blood was used for measuring HbA1c levels and extraction of genomic DNA.
Biochemical Analysis
The biochemical panels of lipid profile and HbA1c assays was studied using with the peripheral blood samples. The values of FBG, PPBG, OGTT-1hr, and 2hrs of tests were obtained from medical records after enrolling the GDM and non-GDM women.
Molecular Sequencing Analysis
We used a Qiagen DNA isolation kit and collected peripheral blood in an EDTA vacutainer to extract the genomic DNA. The procedure was carried out with the RBC and WBC lysis and protein purification involving incubation and different forms of centrifugation to complete and observe 200 µL of genomic DNA from each sample. The NanoDrop spectrophotometer was used to quantify the 240 genomic DNAs to perform the DNA quantification and check the purity of genomic DNA, and finally, all the samples were converted into 20 µg/mL to perform the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for screening of rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs. The amplification protocol was started with a 50 µL reaction consisting of Qiagen PCR master mix, a couple of primer sequences, genomic DNA, and a final volume of the reaction filled with purified water. We performed the PCR reaction in a normal thermal cycler (Applied Biosystems). Denaturation and extensions were optimized at 95°C and 72°C, while annealing was optimized at 64°C for both the SNPs. The performance of the PCR protocol was completed in 1.28 hrs, and complete details of SNPs used in this study have been shown in Table 1. To check the purity and quality of the genotyping for both SNPs, 2% agarose gel was prepared and run. All the PCR products were run on ethidium bromide-stained agarose gel using the UVI gel documentation system of the electrophoretic unit to confirm the presence of bands. Moreover, we purified the PCR samples and subjected them to Sanger sequencing analysis, a method often used in previous published work. We generated genomic data by analyzing chromatograms based on the presence of genotypes and colored peaks after receiving the FASTA, ABI, and PDF files. Figure 1 shows the presence of different genotypes and peaks among rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs after performing the Sanger sequencing analysis.
 |
Table 1 Details of SIRT1 SNPs Included in This Study
|
 |
Figure 1 Identification of rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs present in GDM and non-GDM women using Sanger sequencing analysis.
|
Statistical Analysis
In this study, anthropometric, biochemical, clinical and genotype data were received from involved participants and used to perform the statistical analysis between GDM and non-GDM subjects. All the data from 240 pregnant women were recorded in an Excel sheet. The continuous variables were presented as mean ± SD and compared using a t-test between GDM and non-GDM. The categorical data were compared using the appropriate Chi-square/Fisher exact test. We used ANOVA to compare demographic parameters between SIRT1 genotypes and GDM and non-GDM women, using different BMI criteria. Since there were multiple comparisons, the Bonferroni corrections method was applied. Factors significantly associated with GDM (p < 0.05) in the univariate analysis were considered for the multivariable regression analysis. We used the penalized logistic regression analysis for the multivariable analysis to obtain reliable odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence limits (CIs). Many parameters, such as (weight, height, OGTT-1hr etc), despite being statistically significant in the univariate analysis, were not considered for the multivariable penalized logistic regression due to collinearity. This analysis was performed using SPSS version 25 and STATA version 16. SNP stats,30 Haploview (Version 4.2), and generalized multifactorial dimensionality reduction (GMDR) model software were used in this study. Haplotype analysis and Linkage disequilibrium were studied using Haploview software. Along with the gene-gene interaction analysis, dendrogram, and graphical depletion methods, it was calculated using the GMDR model. Demographic data, genotype, and allele frequencies using (GDM vs non-GDM and obesity vs non-obesity) were also studied. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.
Results
Basic Information
In this study, a total of 240 pregnant Saudi women were recruited based on positive and negative OGTT levels during their second trimester of pregnancy. The 120 pregnant women with elevated OGTT levels were confirmed as GDM, and non-GDM women were confirmed after obtaining normal glucose levels. However, all the GDM women were diabetic for the first time during their initial and multiple pregnancies.
Demographic Features of GDM and Non-GDM Women
Table 2 of this study represents the demographic features of GDM and non-GDM women and involves a comprehensive overview of 240 pregnant women’s clinical, biochemical, molecular and anthropometric data. In this study, GDM women were older than non-GDM women (p = 0.001) after comparing the mean (± SD) ages (31.92 ± 5.27 vs 28.48 ± 6.10). The GDM women were in the obese category (30.65 ± 4.81), while non-GDM (29.16 ± 4.53) were under the overweight category (p = 0.01). Subsequently, weight was also reflected in the BMI in both GDM (77.40 ± 12.94) and non-GDM women (72.95 ± 12.04) and was found to be significantly associated (p = 0.006). Both the HTN levels, ie, SBP (131.97 ± 11.22 vs 120.58 ± 5.29) and DBP (83.10 ± 7.59 vs 78.51 ± 4.44) had elevated levels in GDM women and were associated (p < 0.0001). In 53.3% of GDM women were found to have blood pressure (BP) and in non-GDM women, only 1.7% of were confirmed and showed the strong association (p < 0.0010). Different forms of glucose levels such as FBG (5.55 ± 1.58 vs 4.53 ± 0.58), OGTT-1hr (10.83 ± 1.97 vs 7.08 ± 1.36), OGTT-2hr (9.40 ± 1.67 vs 6.50 ± 1.44), PPBG (8.15 ± 15.28 vs 5.07 ± 0.92) and HbA1c levels (5.58 ± 0.48 vs 5.22 ± 0.34) were elevated in GDM women and associated when studied and compared with non-GDM women (p < 0.0001). Among the lipid profile parameters, there were difference in the levels of HDLc between GDM and non-GDM women (0.68 ± 0.33 vs 0.98 ± 0.41; p < 0.001) and other parameters, such as TC (5.57 ± 1.11 vs 5.76 ± 1.25; p = 0.213), TG (2.18 ± 1.22 vs 2.20 ± 1.92) and LDLc levels (3.86 ± 0.82 vs 3.93 ± 0.97) were not consistent (p > 0.05). The family histories of GDM (23.3% vs 20%; p = 0.001) and T2DM (47.5% vs 40%; p < 0.001) in GDM and non-GDM women were found to be significantly associated (p < 0.05).
 |
Table 2 Clinical and Demographical Parameters Studied Between GDM and Non-GDM Women(s) as a Case-Control Study
|
Penalized Logistic Regression Analysis
On the adjusted penalized logistic regression analysis (Table 3), when there was one unit change in FBG, the risk of having GDM was significantly 3.05 (95% CI: 1.06–8.78) times higher compared with non-GDM (p = 0.04). Similarly, when there was unit change in OGTT-2hr, the risk of having GDM was about 9 (95% CI: 3.48–22.9) times significantly higher (p < 0.001). However, lowering the HDLc values provides 93% (95% CI: 1–46%) less risk of having GDM than non-GDM (p = 0.01). The women who had a history of BP during pregnancy had 41 (95% CI: 4.1–376) times significantly higher risk of getting GDM compared who do not had BP during pregnancy (p = 0.001).
 |
Table 3 Comparison of Penalized Logistic Regression of Clinical and Demographic Parameters Between GDM and Non-GDM
|
Population Genetical Association Analysis in rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs
The details of alleles and genotype frequencies present in GDM and non-GDM women among rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs in SIRT1 gene was shown in Table 4. None of the allele frequencies were found to be positively associated either in rs4746720 (T vs C: OR-0.95 [95% CI: 0.65–1.39]; p = 0.78) and rs10823112 SNPs (T vs C: OR-1.43 [95% CI: 0.95–2.17]; p = 0.07). The allele frequencies of T and C in GDM and non-GDM women were 0.57%, 0.43% and 0.56%, 0.44% in rs4746720 SNP. For rs10823112 SNP, the allele frequencies of T and C were 0.67%, 0.33% in GDM and 0.74%, 0.26% in non-GDM women. The genotype frequencies for rs4646720 SNP in GDM and non-GDM women were found to be 32.5%, 49.2%, 18.3% and 23.3%, 65%, 11.7% in TT, TC, and CC genotypes. In this study, dominant and co-dominant models (TC+CC vs TT: OR-1.80 [95% CI: 1.12–2.89]; p = 0.01 and TT+CC vs TC: OR-1.92 [95% CI: 1.11–3.33]; p = 0.01) were associated (p < 0.05); however, recessive model was not associated (TT+TC vs CC: OR-0.59 [95% CI: 0.26–1.28]; p = 0.148). Additionally, genotypes were also not associated (TC vs TT: OR-0.54 [95% CI: 0.30–0.98]; p = 0.04 and CC vs TT: OR-0.48 [95% CI: 1.12–2.89]; p = 0.053). The TT, TC, CC genotypes of rs10823112 SNP consist of 45.8%, 41.7%, 12.5% in GDM women and 55.8%, 36.7%, 7.5% in non-GDM women. There was no significant association was documented either in genotypes (TC vs TT: OR-1.38 [95% CI: 0.81–2.38]; p = 0.24; CC vs TT: OR-0.68 [95% CI: 0.27–1.72]; p = 0.41) or different forms of genetic models (TC+CC vs TT: OR-1.49 [95% CI: 0.90–2.49]; p = 0.121; TT+CC vs TC: OR-0.81 [95% CI: 0.47–1.40]; p = 0.43; TT+TC vs CC: OR-0.57 [95% CI: 0.21–1.45]; p = −0.20).
 |
Table 4 Probable Association Between Genotype and Allele Frequencies Present in GDM and Non-GDM Women Studied in SIRT1 Gene SNPs
|
ANOVA Analysis Studies
Table 5 in this study consists of ANOVA analysis carried out between rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs in GDM women. TT, TC, CC genotypes in rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs along with 15 dependent covariates and the study results have found that the rs4746720 SNP genotypes were linked to levels of FBG (p = 0.002), PPBG (p = 0.0001), OGTT-2hr (p = 0.02) and HDLc (p = 0.0003). The rs10823112 SNP genotypes were connected to PPBG (p = 0.0001), HbA1c (p = 0.001) and HDLc (p = 0.01) levels were associated (p < 0.05). Most importantly, PPBG and HDLc levels (p < 0.05).
 |
Table 5 ANOVA Analysis Studied Between SIRT1 Genotypes and Dependent Factors in GDM Women
|
Genetical and Statistical Analysis in GDM Women with and without Obesity
The total of 120 GDM were categorized as 56.7% (n = 68) as obese GDM women and 43.3% (n = 52) as non-obese GDM women. Table 6 consists of genotype and allele frequencies for obese and non-obese women among GDM women along with the statistical association. For rs4746720 SNP, 32.4%, 50%, 17.6% of TT, TC, CC genotypes were found in obese GDM women and 32.7%, 48.1%, 19.2% of non-obese GDM women. The allele frequencies for T and C groups for obese and non-obese subgroups were found to be 57.35%, 42.65%, and 56.73%, 43.27% in GDM women. None of the genotypes, (TC vs TT: OR-1.05 [95% CI: 0.46–2.38]; p = 0.91; CC vs TT: OR-0.93 [95% CI: 0.32–2.65]; p = 0.89) dominant, co-dominant and recessive models (TC+CC vs TT: OR-1.02 [95% CI: 0.47–2.19]; p = 0.97; TT+CC vs TC: OR-0.93 [95% CI: 0.45–1.91]; p = 0.83; TT+TC vs CC: OR-1.11 [95% CI: 0.44–2.82]; p = 0.82) and allele frequencies (C vs T: OR-0.97 [95% CI: 0.58–1.63]; p = 0.92) showed the association between obese and non-obese subjects in rs4746720 SNP. Next, the rs10823112 SNP was also studied in obese and non-obese subjects in the GDM women. The genotype frequencies for obese and non-obese subjects were found to be 44.1% (n = 30), 41.2% (n = 28), 14.7% (n = 10) in TT, TC, CC genotypes and 48.1% (n = 25), 42.3% (n = 22), 9.6% (n = 05) in the GDM women. Additionally, the allele frequencies for obese and non-obese women were found to be 67.41%, 35.29% and 69.23%, 30.77% in T and C alleles in rs10823112 SNP. The statistical analysis showed the non-significant association in genotype models (TC vs TT: OR-1.06 [95% CI: 0.49–2.29]; p = 0.88; CC vs TT: OR-1.67 [95% CI: 0.50–5.52]; p = 0.40), genetic models (TC+CC vs TT: OR-1.17 [95% CI: 0.57–2.42]; p = 0.67; TT+CC vs TC: OR-1.05 [95% CI: 0.50–2.18]; p = 0.90; TT+TC vs CC: OR-0.62 [95% CI: 0.20–1.93]; p = 0.40) and allele frequencies (C vs T: OR-1.23 [95% CI: 0.71–2.12]; p = 0.46).
 |
Table 6 Possible Association in GDM Women with and without Obesity in SIRT1 Gene SNPs
|
ANOVA Analysis with Demographic Features of Obesity Among Pregnant Women
In this study, the GDM women consist of 13.3% (n = 16), with normal BMI levels, 30% (n = 36) overweight women, 39.2% (n = 47) obese, 14.2% (n = 17) morbid obese-I and 3.3% (n = 04) morbid obese-II women, while in non-GDM group, 17.5% (n = 21) were having normal BMI levels, 38.3% (n = 46) were overweight, 35.3% (n = 43) were obese, 6.7% (n = 08) were morbid obese-I, and 1.7% (n = 02) were morbid obese-II, groups. The demographic features are involved with age, weight, BMI, FBG, PPBG, OGTT-1hr, OGTT-2hr and HbA1c levels as shown in Table 7. When ANOVA analysis was studied in different forms of obesity levels in GDM women, Weight (p = 0.0002), BMI (p = 0.00001), FBG (p = 0.0001), PPBG (p = 0.00001) and HbA1c (p = 0.0001) were associated and in non-GDM women, Age (p = 0.01), Weight (p = 0.0001), BMI (p = 0.00001), PPBG (p = 0.02) and OGTT-2hr (0.008). Overall, weight and BMI were commonly associated in GDM and non-GDM women with obesity.
 |
Table 7 Calculation of Demographic Features in GDM and Non-GDM Women-Using BMI Criteria
|
Haplotype Analysis for SIRT1 SNPs
Haplotype analysis was studied with T and C alleles present in rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs with the obtained combinations of TT, CT, TC, CC alleles. There was no genetic association present in TT (p = 0.00), CT (p = 0.57), TC (p = 0.54) and CC (p = 0.3) between GDM, and non-GDM groups. All the details were shown in Table 8.
 |
Table 8 Haplotype Analysis Investigated in GDM and Non-GDM Women
|
Linkage Disequilibrium Analysis Studies in SIRT1 Gene
Table 9 in this study has documented the LD analysis, and the combination of GDM women was not associated and had no role (p = 0.13), while in the non-GDM women, there was a strong significant association studied between rs10823112 and rs4746720 SNPs (p < 0.05). Additionally, Figure 2 showed the association with GDM and a strong association with non-GDM women. This indicates the rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs have a role in non-GDM women.
 |
Table 9 Linkage Disequilibrium Analysis Studies in SIRT1 Gene SNPs
|
 |
Figure 2 Linkage disequilibrium analysis studies in SIRT1 SNPs in GDM and non-GDM women.
|
Analysis for GMDR Models
GMDR models were studied in this study in different forms, such as gene-gene interaction analysis (Table 10), and different predicted models (Figure 3) such as dendrogram analysis and a graphical depletion model in GDM and non-GDM women with rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs in SIRT1 gene. The gene-gene interaction analysis confirmed a negative association with the first model of rs4746720 SNP (p = 0.06) and a positive association with the second model of the combination of rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs (p = 0.0038). The CVCs for the first and second models were 9/10 and 10/10. Blue-colored flat dendrograms were present and represented the redundancies. In the graphical depletions, high risks are present in dark cells and low risks are present in the lighter cells. However, blank cells indicate the absence of genotype data. The graphical depletion model confirmed the nominal risk only with the rs4746720 SNP. The overall analysis of GMDR confirmed that the nominal association risk is present in the GDM women.
 |
Table 10 Gene-Gene Interaction Analysis Used in Analyzing the GDM Risk in SIRT1 Gene SNPs
|
 |
Figure 3 Precited models presented in graphical and depletion methods analyzed using GMDR model in GDM women. (a) Dendrogram analysis (bold number specifies the rs numbers used in this study ie, rs4746720 and rs10823112), (b) mode of risk for dendrogram analysis, (c) graphical depletion model (bold number rs4746720 SNP indicates that it was involved this model).
|
Discussion
Diabetes and obesity are becoming highly frequent in Saudi Arabia due to their high prevalence, and GDM is also increasing concurrently in the sub-category of diabetes mellitus. Considering family history, BMI values, lifestyle habits and environmental factors will contribute to future complications. The prevalence of GDM in the Saudi Arabia has been ripening gradually31 by 2–3 folds ranging from 8.9% to 53.4%. However, Alfadhli et al32 studies have addressed the increase in the prevalence of GDM in Saudi Arabia, which is mainly due to adoption of new diagnostic criteria for screening of GDM by IADPSG group.32 This study included 75 g of 2-hour OGTT values, as recommended by ADA criteria. This study was carried out from a single tertiary care center, rather than multiple tertiary care. The aim of this study was to investigate the molecular screening for rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs present in women diagnosed with GDM and non-GDM women based on OGTT levels in the Saudi Arabia. The study results confirmed the genetic association with ANOVA analysis, LD analysis and GMDR models (p < 0.05) including rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs in SIRT1 gene.
Global wide studies were carried out with different SNPs studied in SIRT1 gene in human diseases. SIRT1 gene is associated with T2DM,23,33–46 various forms of diabetes24,34,36,38,43,45–54 and other human diseases such as obesity,16,17,19,50,55–64 chronic diseases,65,66 CAD,35,49,67–74 rheumatoid,75,76 sclerosis,77,78 and female diseases such as pre-eclampsia,79 endometriosis,80 and female infertility.81 Apart from humans, SIRT1 SNPs were also studied in cattle’s/sheep’s.82–89 Additionally, meta-analysis studies were also documented in SIRT1 SNPs.90–93 The serum levels were also studied in obesity patients with NAFLD,94 Parkinson’s disease,95 and other human diseases.96–100 In a Saudi population, Kaabi et al41 have performed the molecular studies in rs12778366 and rs3758391 SNPs in SIRT1 gene and showed the negative association. In this study, rs4746720 and rs10823112 SNPs were studied in pregnant (GDM and non-GDM) women, and the study results are not associated with other ethnicities because, till now, there are no molecular studies documented between GDM and SIRT1 SNPs.
This study examined many characteristics of glucose levels, which demonstrated a favorable correlation with ANOVA analysis (Table 5 and Table 7), LD analysis (Table 9), and gene-gene interaction analysis (Table 10). This study analysis suggests that while SIRT1 SNPs may not influence genotyping analysis, they do impact glucose levels, indicating a relationship between GDM and the SIRT1 gene.
SIRT1 activation influences glucose/lipid metabolism in diabetes patients, as shown in Figure 4. It helps to preserve pancreatic β-cells and enhance insulin secretion while also promoting lipid mobilization in adipose tissue, glucose uptake in skeletal muscle, and mitochondrial biogenesis. In addition, it enhances insulin sensitivity in the liver and muscle. SIRT1 effectively suppresses Uncoupling Protein 2 from working in the pancreas by interacting with FOXO. This causes insulin production to growth and promotes the survival of β cells.101–103 In a study by Lee et al, it was shown that SIRT1 has the ability to inhibit NF-κB activation, thereby providing protection to β cells against oxidative damage and cytokines. When SIRT1 is overexpressed, it suppresses cytokines from killing cells and halts the production of nitric oxide synthase (iNOS). Through deacetylating the NF-κB p65 unit, SIRT1 effectively decreases iNOS production.104 Previous study discovered that increasing the expression of SIRT1 in pancreatic β-cells of transgenic mice resulted in enhanced glucose and release insulin.105
 |
Figure 4 Role of sirtuins in insulin signaling pathways.
|
However, maintaining normal NAD+ production restores glucose-sensitive insulin secretion and improves glucose tolerance in old BESTO animals. SIRT1 protein expression is decreased among diabetic patients. Low SIRT1 levels contribute to muscular insulin resistance. However, it has been observed that SIRT1 can interact with PI3K adaptor subunit p85 without insulin. This interaction allows SIRT1 to effectively regulate insulin signaling in skeletal muscle cells, even at normal insulin concentrations. In addition, resveratrol, which turns on SIRT1, can protect muscle cells from insulin resistance triggered by TNF-α or prolonged hyperinsulinemia.106 However, we have revised and created Figure 4 from Ulu et al106 studies, translated from Turkish to English language.
Family history has an important element in human diseases. In the current era, GDM is increasing in tandem with the growing prevalence of T2DM and obesity.107 Diabetes is among the designated conditions that manifest with particular combinations within familial circumstances. Apart from family and self-histories, undesirable habits designate our future quality of life, whether it will be disease-free or an unhealthy or medication lifestyle. In this study, 23.3% of the GDM women had a family history of GDM and 47.5% had a family history of T2DM, while 40% had a family history of T2DM and 20% of family history with GDM is present in non-GDM women. Thus, the GDM women may have future complications, especially for developing T2DM between 5 and 10 years of their life. Furthermore, consanguinity is also playing an important role in GDM women of Saudi Arabia. The accurate prevalence of consanguinity is not documented in the recent decade, although the previously documented prevalence was around 40–50% in Saudi Arabia.108–114 The impact of consanguineous marriages will lead to genetic disorders in the future in all the family members and when it comes in married female cousin will leads to direct or indirect reproductive issues which include multifactorial disorders such as diabetes, asthma, cancers, obesity, mental retardation, epilepsy and infections. The married women may face fertility and pregnancy complications, as pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, GDM, and miscarriages can also occur. Majorly, the children born to consanguineous parents will be affected with genetic disorders.115 One of the limitations in this study was not documenting the details of consanguinity in the pregnant women.
In this study, 91.7% of GDM women were on a diet, and 8.3% of them were on insulin. None of the GDM women were on medication. Carbohydrates are one of the major dietary factors affecting the PPBG levels in DM ie, as well as in GDM.
The practical implications of SIRT1 gene polymorphism case-control studies in GDM women have an important role, which can further be associated with prevention of screening and may be beneficial in treatment strategies. Future studies in different populations should be carried out with these two SNPs (rs4746720 and rs10823112) in SIRT1 gene among the different ethnicities which can explore the functional and biological mechanisms present in SIRT1 gene. If we succeed in addressing these issues, then we may acquire a better understanding between the role of genetics in GDM, as well as its impact on maternal and neonatal health issues.
The main impact of this study was considered to be the screening of SIRT1 SNPs in the GDM women, and this study was considered to be the initial study carried out in GDM patients in Saudi Arabia. In this study, complete pregnant women (n = 240) were enrolled from Saudi ethnicity based on 75 g of OGTT tests. Recruiting all the patients from a single tertiary center will be considered as one of the limitations of this study. Missing out serum levels, restricting the screening with a couple of SNPs in SIRT1 gene and regulating to 120 GDM cases and controls will be considered as the limitations of this study.
Conclusions
This study concludes that rs4746720 SNP was associated, and also with combination of clinical, biochemical and genotype data, confirming the glucose levels influence SIRT1 gene SNPs. Future studies will be recommended to carry out these types of studies in the global population.
Data Sharing Statement
Based upon the reasonable interest, the corresponding author can share the data.
Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board in College of Medicine at King Saud University (E-22-7318; 10th January 2023-approved date). All the pregnant women participated in this study have confirmed and signed the written consent form before the participation in this study.
Consent for Publication
The pregnant women have provided the written informed consent form for this study.
Author Contributions
All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Funding
The authors extend their sincere appreciation to the Deanship of Research and Graduate Studies at King Khalid University for funding this work through a Large Groups Project under grant number RGP.2/533/44.
Disclosure
The authors report no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this research article.
References
1. Oğlak SC, Yılmaz EZ, Budak MŞ. Abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness combined with a 50-g glucose challenge test at 24–28 weeks of pregnancy in predicting gestational diabetes mellitus. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2024;44(1):2329880. doi:10.1080/01443615.2024.2329880
2. Monod C, Kotzaeridi G, Linder T, et al. Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in women with a family history of type 2 diabetes in first-and second-degree relatives. Acta Diabetologica. 2023;60(3):345–351. doi:10.1007/s00592-022-02011-w
3. Semnani-Azad Z, Gaillard R, Hughes AE, Boyle KE, Tobias DK, Perng W. Precision stratification of prognostic risk factors associated with outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Communicat Med. 2024;4(1):9. doi:10.1038/s43856-023-00427-1
4. Oğlak SC, Aşır F, Yılmaz EZ, Bolluk G, Korak T, Ağaçayak E. The immunohistochemical and bioinformatics analysis of the placental expressions of vascular cell adhesion protein 1 (VCAM-1) and High Mobility Group Box 1 (HMGB1) proteins in gestational diabetic mothers. Zeitschrift für Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie. 2024;229(2):90–98. doi:10.1055/a-2451-2223
5. Elliott A, Walters RK, Pirinen M, et al. Distinct and shared genetic architectures of gestational diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes. Nature Genet. 2024;56(3):377–382. doi:10.1038/s41588-023-01607-4
6. Seifu CN, Immanuel J, Hague WM, et al. Association between immediate treatment of early gestational diabetes mellitus and breastfeeding outcomes: findings from the TOBOGM study. Diabetes Care. 2024;47:dc231635.
7. Alsaedi SA, Altalhi AA, Nabrawi MF, Aldainy AA, Wali RM. Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus among pregnant patients visiting National Guard primary health care centers in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2020;41(2):144. doi:10.15537/smj.2020.2.24842
8. Rajabi A, Khajehlandi M, Siahkuhian M, Akbarnejad A, Khoramipour K, Suzuki K. Effect of 8 weeks aerobic training and saffron supplementation on inflammation and metabolism in middle-aged obese women with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Sports. 2022;10(11):167. doi:10.3390/sports10110167
9. Alsulami S, Baig M, Ahmad T, et al. Obesity prevalence, physical activity, and dietary practices among adults in Saudi Arabia. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1124051. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1124051
10. Takele WW, Vesco KK, Josefson J, et al. Effective interventions in preventing gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Communicat Med. 2024;4(1):75. doi:10.1038/s43856-024-00491-1
11. Plows JF, Stanley JL, Baker PN, Reynolds CM, Vickers MH. The pathophysiology of gestational diabetes mellitus. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(11):3342. doi:10.3390/ijms19113342
12. Oğlak SC, Yavuz A, Olmez F, Gedik Özköse Z, Süzen Çaypınar S. The reduced serum concentrations of β-arrestin-1 and β-arrestin-2 in pregnancies complicated with gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2022;35(25):10017–10024. doi:10.1080/14767058.2022.2083495
13. Li W, She L, Zhang M, et al. The associations of IGF2, IGF2R and IGF2BP2 gene polymorphisms with gestational diabetes mellitus: a case-control study. PLoS One. 2024;19(5):e0298063. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0298063
14. Eleftheriou D, Athanasiadou KI, Sifnaios E, et al. Sleep disorders during pregnancy: an underestimated risk factor for gestational diabetes mellitus. Endocrine. 2024;83(1):41–50. doi:10.1007/s12020-023-03537-x
15. Sadeghi MB, Nakhaee A, Saravani R, Sadeghi MH, Sargazi S, Nia MH. SIRT1 functional polymorphisms (rs12778366, rs3758391) as genetic biomarkers of susceptibility to type 2 diabetes mellitus in Iranians: a case-control study and computational analysis. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries. 2021;41:1–9.
16. Clark SJ, Falchi M, Olsson B, et al. Association of sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) gene SNPs and transcript expression levels with severe obesity. Obesity. 2012;20(1):178–185. doi:10.1038/oby.2011.200
17. Zillikens MC, van Meurs JB, Rivadeneira F, et al. SIRT1 genetic variation is related to BMI and risk of obesity. Diabetes. 2009;58(12):2828–2834. doi:10.2337/db09-0536
18. Weyrich P, Machicao F, Reinhardt J, et al. SIRT1 genetic variants associate with the metabolic response of Caucasians to a controlled lifestyle intervention–the TULIP Study. BMC Med Genet. 2008;9:1–7. doi:10.1186/1471-2350-9-100
19. Peeters AV, Beckers S, Verrijken A, et al. Association of SIRT1 gene variation with visceral obesity. Hum Genet. 2008;124:431–436. doi:10.1007/s00439-008-0567-8
20. Mac-Marcjanek K, Zieleniak A, Zurawska-Klis M, Cypryk K, Wozniak L, Wojcik M. Expression profile of diabetes-related genes associated with leukocyte sirtuin 1 overexpression in gestational diabetes. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(12):3826. doi:10.3390/ijms19123826
21. Dmitrenko O, Karpova N, Nurbekov M. Association of polymorphisms rs1801282 of the PPARG gene, rs8192678 of the PPARGC1A gene and rs7895833 of the SIRT1 gene with the risk of Preeclampsia in pregnant women with gestational diabetes in the Russian population. J Genet Genomic Sci. 2022;7(036):2.
22. Han J, Wei M, Wang Q, et al. Association of genetic variants of SIRT1 with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Gene Expression. 2015;16(4):177. doi:10.3727/105221615X14399878166195
23. Rai E, Sharma S, Kaul S, et al. The interactive effect of SIRT1 promoter region polymorphism on type 2 diabetes susceptibility in the North Indian population. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48621. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048621
24. Li J, Yang Y, Xia Y, et al. Effect of SIRT1 gene single-nucleotide polymorphisms on susceptibility to type 1 diabetes in a Han Chinese population. J Endocrinol Invest. 2024;47(4):819–826. doi:10.1007/s40618-023-02190-5
25. Pai D, Adiga S, Suresh G, et al. Serum SIRT1 levels and genetic variants in diabetic nephropathy: insights from a cross-sectional study. Res J Pharm Technol. 2024;17(6):2829–2834.
26. Dmitrenko O, Karpova N, Nurbekov M. ACE, PPARG, SIRT1 gene polymorphisms but not PPARGC1A polymorphism are risk factors for gestational diabetes in the Russian population. J Genet Genomic Sci. 2022;7(035):2.
27. Liu Y, Ge Z-P, Sun L-Z, Tong P, Lu H-M. Genetic variation of rs3811463 is associated with gestational diabetes mellitus susceptibility. Exp Ther Med. 2017;14(5):5157–5162. doi:10.3892/etm.2017.5188
28. Ali Khan I, Alhaizan MA, Neyazi SM, Al-Hakeem MM, Alshammary AF. Relevance of serum levels and functional genetic variants in vitamin D receptor gene among Saudi women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Nutrients. 2023;15(19):4288. doi:10.3390/nu15194288
29. Oben A, Moore M, Wallace E, et al. Validation of a remote monitoring blood pressure device in pregnancy. Am J Hypertens. 2023;36(6):341–347. doi:10.1093/ajh/hpad004
30. Solé XG, Guinó E, Valls J, Iniesta R, Moreno V. SNPStats: a web tool for the analysis of association studies. Bioinformatics. 2006;22:1928–1929. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btl268
31. Khayat AA. Knowledge of gestational diabetes mellitus among Saudi women in a primary health care center of Almadinah Almunawarah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Cureus. 2022;14(3):1.
32. Alfadhli EM, Osman EN, Basri TH, et al. Gestational diabetes among Saudi women: prevalence, risk factors and pregnancy outcomes. Ann Saudi Med. 2015;35(3):222–230. doi:10.5144/0256-4947.2015.222
33. Ali S, Nafis S, Kalaiarasan P, Rai E, Sharma S, Bamezai RN. Understanding genetic heterogeneity in type 2 diabetes by delineating physiological phenotypes: SIRT1 and its gene network in impaired insulin secretion. Rev Diabet Stud. 2016;13(1):17–34. doi:10.1900/RDS.2016.13.17
34. Cruz M, Valladares-Salgado A, Garcia-Mena J, et al. Candidate gene association study conditioning on individual ancestry in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome from Mexico City. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2010;26(4):261–270. doi:10.1002/dmrr.1082
35. Dardano A, Lucchesi D, Garofolo M, et al. SIRT1 rs7896005 polymorphism affects major vascular outcomes, not all-cause mortality, in Caucasians with type 2 diabetes: a 13-year observational study. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2022;38(4):e3523. doi:10.1002/dmrr.3523
36. Domínguez-Cruz MG, Muñoz ML, Totomoch-Serra A, et al. Maya gene variants related to the risk of type 2 diabetes in a family-based association study. Gene. 2020;730:144259. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2019.144259
37. Dong Y, Guo T, Traurig M, et al. SIRT1 is associated with a decrease in acute insulin secretion and a sex specific increase in risk for type 2 diabetes in Pima Indians. Mol Genet Metab. 2011;104(4):661–665. doi:10.1016/j.ymgme.2011.08.001
38. Gambino R, Fanni G, Togliatto G, et al. Rs12778366 single nucleotide polymorphism of Sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) and response to resveratrol supplementation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Acta Diabetol. 2019;56(8):963–966. doi:10.1007/s00592-019-01341-6
39. García-Chapa EG, Leal-Ugarte E, Peralta-Leal V, Durán-González J, Meza-Espinoza JP. Genetic epidemiology of type 2 diabetes in Mexican mestizos. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:3937893. doi:10.1155/2017/3937893
40. Han J, Wei M, Wang Q, et al. Association of genetic variants of SIRT1 with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Gene Expr. 2015;16(4):177–185.
41. Kaabi YA, Abdelmola AA, Abdelwahab SI, Alshaikh NA, Halawi MA, Kuriri HM. Common genetic variants in SIRT1 gene promoter and type 2 diabetes mellitus in Saudi Arabia. Clin Lab. 2024;70(2). doi:10.7754/Clin.Lab.2023.230804
42. Letonja J, Završnik M, Makuc J, et al. Sirtuin 1 rs7069102 polymorphism is associated with diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2021;21(5):642–646. doi:10.17305/bjbms.2020.5368
43. Maeda S, Koya D, Araki SI, et al. Association between single nucleotide polymorphisms within genes encoding sirtuin families and diabetic nephropathy in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes. Clin Exp Nephrol. 2011;15(3):381–390. doi:10.1007/s10157-011-0418-0
44. Ramírez Á, Hernández M, Suárez-Sánchez R, et al. Type 2 diabetes-associated polymorphisms correlate with SIRT1 and TGF-β1 gene expression. Ann Hum Genet. 2020;84(2):185–194. doi:10.1111/ahg.12363
45. Wang Y, Tong L, Gu N, et al. Association of sirtuin 1 gene polymorphisms with the risk of coronary heart disease in Chinese Han patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Res. 2022;2022:8494502. doi:10.1155/2022/8494502
46. Zillikens MC, van Meurs JB, Sijbrands EJ, et al. SIRT1 genetic variation and mortality in type 2 diabetes: interaction with smoking and dietary niacin. Free Radic Biol Med. 2009;46(6):836–841. doi:10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2008.12.022
47. Akhtar S, Siragy HM. Pro-renin receptor suppresses mitochondrial biogenesis and function via AMPK/SIRT-1/ PGC-1α pathway in diabetic kidney. PLoS One. 2019;14(12):e0225728. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225728
48. Casarotto AAF, Galera BB, Sumiyoshi LM, Floôr TM. Polymorphism rs7895833 in the SIRT1 gene and its association with dyslipidaemia in the elderly. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol. 2019;54(4):214–219. doi:10.1016/j.regg.2019.01.008
49. Hu Y, Wang L, Chen S, et al. Association between the SIRT1 mRNA expression and acute coronary syndrome. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2015;22(2):165–182. doi:10.5551/jat.24844
50. Luczyński W, Fendler W, Ramatowska A, et al. Polymorphism of the FTO gene influences body weight in children with type 1 diabetes without severe obesity. Int J Endocrinol. 2014;2014:630712. doi:10.1155/2014/630712
51. Peng Y, Zhang G, Tang H, et al. Influence of SIRT1 polymorphisms for diabetic foot susceptibility and severity. Medicine. 2018;97(28):e11455. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000011455
52. Sun Y, Wang J, Meng Y. Correlation between polymorphisms of the SIRT1 gene microRNA target sites and diabetic nephropathy. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2021;25(6):387–398. doi:10.1089/gtmb.2020.0261
53. Tang K, Sun M, Shen J, Zhou B. Transcriptional coactivator p300 and silent information regulator 1 (SIRT1) gene polymorphism associated with diabetic kidney disease in a Chinese cohort. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2017;125(8):530–537. doi:10.1055/s-0043-103966
54. Zhao Y, Wei J, Hou X, et al. SIRT1 rs10823108 and FOXO1 rs17446614 responsible for genetic susceptibility to diabetic nephropathy. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):10285. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10612-7
55. da Fonseca ACP, Assis I, Salum KCR, et al. Genetic variants in DBC1, SIRT1, UCP2 and ADRB2 as potential biomarkers for severe obesity and metabolic complications. Front Genet. 2024;15:1363417. doi:10.3389/fgene.2024.1363417
56. Fernández-Galilea M, Pérez-Matute P, Prieto-Hontoria PL, et al. α-Lipoic acid treatment increases mitochondrial biogenesis and promotes beige adipose features in subcutaneous adipocytes from overweight/obese subjects. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2015;1851(3):273–281. doi:10.1016/j.bbalip.2014.12.013
57. Ieraci A, Barbieri SS, Macchi C, et al. BDNF Val66Met polymorphism alters food intake and hypothalamic BDNF expression in mice. J Cell Physiol. 2020;235(12):9667–9675. doi:10.1002/jcp.29778
58. Kilic U, Gok O, Elibol-Can B, et al. SIRT1 gene variants are related to risk of childhood obesity. Eur J Pediatr. 2015;174(4):473–479. doi:10.1007/s00431-014-2424-1
59. Lee M, Choi S, Lee Y, Oh HH. The gender association of the SIRT1 rs7895833 polymorphism with pediatric obesity: a 3-year panel study. J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics. 2016;9(5–6):265–275. doi:10.1159/000454713
60. Liu S, Kim TH, Franklin DA, Zhang Y. Protection against high-fat-diet-induced obesity in MDM2(C305F) mice due to reduced p53 activity and enhanced energy expenditure. Cell Rep. 2017;18(4):1005–1018. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.12.086
61. Mas-Bermejo P, Azcona-Granada N, Peña E, et al. Genetic risk score based on obesity-related genes and progression in weight loss after bariatric surgery: a 60-month follow-up study. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2024;20(9):814–821. doi:10.1016/j.soard.2024.04.002
62. Senousy MA, Shaker OG, Ayeldeen G, Radwan AF. Association of lncRNA MEG3 rs941576 polymorphism, expression profile, and its related targets with the risk of obesity-related colorectal cancer: potential clinical insights. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):10271. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-60265-6
63. Shimoyama Y, Suzuki K, Hamajima N, Niwa T. Sirtuin 1 gene polymorphisms are associated with body fat and blood pressure in Japanese. Transl Res. 2011;157(6):339–347. doi:10.1016/j.trsl.2011.02.004
64. van den Berg SW, Dollé ME, Imholz S, et al. Genetic variations in regulatory pathways of fatty acid and glucose metabolism are associated with obesity phenotypes: a population-based cohort study. Int J Obes. 2009;33(10):1143–1152. doi:10.1038/ijo.2009.152
65. Ardinata D, Sari Harahap N, Lubis NDA, Nasution TA. Exploring the moderating effects of SIRT1 and gene polymorphisms rs7895833 on the relationship between hemoglobin levels and physical frailty in elderly adults with comorbid chronic diseases: a moderated mediation analysis. F1000Res. 2023;12:510. doi:10.12688/f1000research.133517.1
66. Gao SL, Wang YH, Li CY, et al. A highly significant association between Cathepsin S gene polymorphisms rs12068264 and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease susceptibility in Han Chinese population. Biosci Rep. 2018;38(4). doi:10.1042/BSR20180410
67. Cui Y, Wang H, Chen H, et al. Genetic analysis of the SIRT1 gene promoter in myocardial infarction. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2012;426(2):232–236. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.071
68. Heidari L, Ghaderian SMH, Bastami M, et al. Reverse expression pattern of sirtuin-1 and histone deacetylase-9 in coronary artery disease. Arch Physiol Biochem. 2023;129(1):46–53. doi:10.1080/13813455.2020.1797100
69. Kilic U, Gok O, Bacaksiz A, Izmirli M, Elibol-Can B, Uysal O. SIRT1 gene polymorphisms affect the protein expression in cardiovascular diseases. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e90428. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0090428
70. Kilic U, Gok O, Elibol-Can B, Uysal O, Bacaksiz A. Efficacy of statins on sirtuin 1 and endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression: the role of sirtuin 1 gene variants in human coronary atherosclerosis. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2015;42(4):321–330. doi:10.1111/1440-1681.12362
71. Nasiri M, Rauf M, Kamfiroozie H, Zibaeenezhad MJ, Jamali Z. SIRT1 gene polymorphisms associated with decreased risk of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. Gene. 2018;672:16–20. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2018.05.117
72. Ramkaran P, Phulukdaree A, Khan S, Moodley D, Chuturgoon AA. Sirtuin 1 rs1467568 and rs7895833 in South African Indians with early-onset coronary artery disease. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2016;27(4):213–217. doi:10.5830/CVJA-2015-085
73. Shimoyama Y, Mitsuda Y, Tsuruta Y, Suzuki K, Hamajima N, Niwa T. SIRTUIN 1 gene polymorphisms are associated with cholesterol metabolism and coronary artery calcification in Japanese hemodialysis patients. J Ren Nutr. 2012;22(1):114–119. doi:10.1053/j.jrn.2011.10.025
74. Song X, Wang H, Wang C, et al. Association of sirtuin gene polymorphisms with susceptibility to coronary artery disease in a north Chinese population. Biomed Res Int. 2022;2022:4294008. doi:10.1155/2022/4294008
75. Sabry D, Kaddafy SR, Abdelaziz AA, et al. Association of SIRT-1 gene polymorphism and vitamin D level in Egyptian patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Med Res. 2018;10(3):189–195. doi:10.14740/jocmr3067e
76. Zhou J, He YW, Fu L, et al. Gene polymorphisms of SIRT1 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Int J Rheum Dis. 2022;25(2):210–217. doi:10.1111/1756-185X.14257
77. Gedvilaite G, Vilkeviciute A, Kriauciuniene L, Asmoniene V, Liutkeviciene R. Does CETP rs5882, rs708272, SIRT1 rs12778366, FGFR2 rs2981582, STAT3 rs744166, VEGFA rs833068, IL6 rs1800795 polymorphisms play a role in optic neuritis development? Ophthalmic Genet. 2019;40(3):219–226. doi:10.1080/13816810.2019.1622022
78. Kubiliute A, Gedvilaite G, Vilkeviciute A, et al. The role of SIRT1 level and SIRT1 gene polymorphisms in optic neuritis patients with multiple sclerosis. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023;18(1):64. doi:10.1186/s13023-023-02665-x
79. Khadir F, Rahimi Z, Vaisi-Raygani A, Shakiba E, Pouramir M, Bahrehmand F. Variants and haplotypes of SIRT1 (rs7895833, rs7069102, and rs2273773) are associated with the risk of preeclampsia and affect the trace elements and antioxidant enzymes levels. Biochem Genet. 2024;62(4):2667–2685. doi:10.1007/s10528-023-10548-w
80. Veena KV, Siddamalla S, Deenadayal M, Sisinthy S, Bhanoori M. Histone deacetylase 1, Sirtuin 1, and Sirtuin 3 single-nucleotide polymorphisms and the risk of endometriosis in South Indian women. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;42(7):3230–3235. doi:10.1080/01443615.2022.2109955
81. Alam F, Rehman R, Fatima SS, Ashraf M, Khan TA. Suggested role of silent information regulator 1 (SIRT1) gene in female infertility: a cross-sectional study in Pakistan. Int J Clin Pract. 2021;75(6):e14132. doi:10.1111/ijcp.14132
82. Gui L, Hao R, Zhang Y, Zhao X, Zan L. Haplotype distribution in the class I sirtuin genes and their associations with ultrasound carcass traits in Qinchuan cattle (Bos Taurus). Mol Cell Probes. 2015;29(3):167–171. doi:10.1016/j.mcp.2015.03.007
83. Gui LS, Raza SHA, Sun YG, Khan R, Ullah I, Han YC. Detection of polymorphisms in the promoter of bovine SIRT1 gene and their effects on intramuscular fat content in Chinese indigenous cattle. Gene. 2019;700:47–51. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2019.03.022
84. Gui LS, Raza SHA, Zhou L, et al. Association between single nucleotide polymorphisms in SIRT1 and SIRT2 Loci and Growth in Tibetan Sheep. Animals. 2020;10(8):1362. doi:10.3390/ani10081362
85. Li M, Sun X, Hua L, et al. SIRT1 gene polymorphisms are associated with growth traits in Nanyang cattle. Mol Cell Probes. 2013;27(5–6):215–220. doi:10.1016/j.mcp.2013.07.002
86. Selvaggi M, Carbonara C, Ciotola F, et al. Determination of a possible relationship between a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of the SIRT1 gene and production and reproduction traits in the Agerolese cattle breed. Arch Anim Breed. 2019;62(1):107–112. doi:10.5194/aab-62-107-2019
87. Worku D, Gowane G, Alex R, Joshi P, Verma A. Inputs for optimizing selection platform for milk production traits of dairy Sahiwal cattle. PLoS One. 2022;17(5):e0267800. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0267800
88. Worku D, Gowane GR, Mukherjee A, Alex R, Joshi P, Verma A. Associations between polymorphisms of LAP3 and SIRT1 genes with clinical mastitis and milk production traits in Sahiwal and Karan Fries dairy cattle. Vet Med Sci. 2022;8(6):2593–2604. doi:10.1002/vms3.924
89. Worku D, Verma A. Genetic variation in bovine LAP3 and SIRT1 genes associated with fertility traits in dairy cattle. BMC Genom Data. 2024;25(1):32. doi:10.1186/s12863-024-01209-x
90. Wei W, Xu X, Li H, et al. The SIRT2 polymorphism rs10410544 and risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a meta-analysis. Neuromol Med. 2014;16:448–456. doi:10.1007/s12017-014-8291-0
91. Zhao J, Zhang L-X, Wang Y-T, Li Y, Chen M, MD HL. Genetic polymorphisms and the risk of diabetic foot: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2022;21(4):574–587. doi:10.1177/1534734620977599
92. Sun M, Du M, Zhang W, et al. Survival and clinicopathological significance of SIRT1 expression in cancers: a meta-analysis. Front Endocrinol. 2019;10:121. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00121
93. Tang W, Chen Y, Fang X, Wang Y, Fan W, Zhang C. SIRT1 rs3758391 and major depressive disorder: new data and meta-analysis. Neurosci Bull. 2018;34:863–866. doi:10.1007/s12264-018-0235-5
94. Mariani S, Fiore D, Basciani S, et al. Plasma levels of SIRT1 associate with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in obese patients. Endocrine. 2015;49:711–716. doi:10.1007/s12020-014-0465-x
95. Zhu Y, Zhu X, Zhou Y, Zhang D. Reduced serum SIRT1 levels in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a cross-sectional study in China. Neurol Sci. 2021;42:1835–1841. doi:10.1007/s10072-020-04711-z
96. Razi S, Cogger VC, Kennerson M, et al. SIRT1 polymorphisms and serum-induced SIRT1 protein expression in aging and frailty: the CHAMP study. J Gerontol A. 2017;72(7):870–876. doi:10.1093/gerona/glx018
97. Ma L, Niu H, Sha G, Zhang Y, Liu P, Li Y. Serum SIRT1 is associated with frailty and adipokines in older adults. J Nutr Health Aging. 2019;23:246–250. doi:10.1007/s12603-018-1149-7
98. Harun H, Veronike E, Kam A, Amelia R. Correlation between oxidative stress, SIRT1 serum level, and eGFR on elderly. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA. 2023;9(8):6432–6438. doi:10.29303/jppipa.v9i8.4916
99. Kaikaryte K, Gedvilaite G, Vilkeviciute A, et al. SIRT1: genetic variants and serum levels in age-related macular degeneration. Life. 2022;12(5):753. doi:10.3390/life12050753
100. Otsuka R, Morishita H, Iida K, et al. Serum versus tissue SIRT1 as potentially valuable biomarkers in gastric cancer. Anticancer Res. 2023;43(4):1485–1491. doi:10.21873/anticanres.16297
101. Kitada M, Koya D. SIRT1 in type 2 diabetes: mechanisms and therapeutic potential. Diabet Metabol J. 2013;37(5):315–325. doi:10.4093/dmj.2013.37.5.315
102. Bordone L, Guarente L. Calorie restriction, SIRT1 and metabolism: understanding longevity. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2005;6(4):298–305. doi:10.1038/nrm1616
103. Bordone L, Motta MC, Picard F, et al. Sirt1 regulates insulin secretion by repressing UCP2 in pancreatic β cells. PLoS biol. 2006;4(2):e31. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040031
104. Lee J-H, Song M-Y, Song E-K, et al. Overexpression of SIRT1 protects pancreatic β-cells against cytokine toxicity by suppressing the nuclear factor-κB signaling pathway. Diabetes. 2009;58(2):344–351. doi:10.2337/db07-1795
105. Moynihan KA, Grimm AA, Plueger MM, et al. Increased dosage of mammalian Sir2 in pancreatic β cells enhances glucose-stimulated insulin secretion in mice. Cell Metab. 2005;2(2):105–117. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2005.07.001
106. Ulu İ, Genç GÇ, Çelik SK. Sirtuin 1 ve Sirtuin 2’nin Tip 2 Diyabet ile İlişkisi. Türkiye Diyabet ve Obezite Dergisi. 2021;5(1):81–88.
107. Sweeting A, Hannah W, Backman H, et al. Epidemiology and management of gestational diabetes. Lancet. 2024;404(10448):175–192. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00825-0
108. Khayat AM, Alshareef BG, Alharbi SF, AlZahrani MM, Alshangity BA, Tashkandi NF. Consanguineous marriage and its association with genetic disorders in Saudi Arabia: a review. Cureus. 2024;16(2):1.
109. Saedi-Wong S, Al-Frayh AR. Effects of consanguineous matings on anthropometric measurements of Saudi newborn infants. Fam Pract. 1989;6(3):217–220. doi:10.1093/fampra/6.3.217
110. El-Hazmi M, Al-Swailem A, Warsy A, Al-Swailem A, Sulaimani R, Al-Meshari A. Consanguinity among the Saudi Arabian population. J Med Genet. 1995;32(8):623–626. doi:10.1136/jmg.32.8.623
111. Husain MA, Bunyan MA. Consanguineous marriages in a Saudi population and the effect of inbreeding on prenatal and postnatal mortality. Ann Trop Paediatrics. 1997;17(2):155–160. doi:10.1080/02724936.1997.11747879
112. Al-Abdulkareem AA, Ballal SG. Consanguineous marriage in an urban area of Saudi Arabia: rates and adverse health effects on the offspring. J Community Health. 1998;23(1):75–83. doi:10.1023/A:1018727005707
113. Middle I, Al-Salloum A, Al-Herbish A, Qurachi M, Al-Omar A. Regional variations in the prevalence of consanguinity in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2007;28(12):1881–1884.
114. Albanghali MA. Prevalence of consanguineous marriage among Saudi citizens of Albaha, a cross-sectional study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(4):3767. doi:10.3390/ijerph20043767
115. Oniya O, Neves K, Ahmed B, Konje JC. A review of the reproductive consequences of consanguinity. Eur J Obstetrics Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;232:87–96. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.10.042