The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) on chromosome 6 is associated with susceptibility to more common diseases than any other region of the human genome, including almost all disorders classified as autoimmune. In type 1 diabetes the major genetic susceptibility determinants have been mapped to the MHC class II genes HLA-DQB1 and HLA-DRB1 (refs 1-3), but these genes cannot completely explain the association between type 1 diabetes and the MHC region 4-11 . Owing to the region's extreme gene density, the multiplicity of diseaseassociated alleles, strong associations between alleles, limited genotyping capability, and inadequate statistical approaches and sample sizes, which, and how many, loci within the MHC determine susceptibility remains unclear. Here, in several large type 1 diabetes data sets, we analyse a combined total of 1,729 polymorphisms, and apply statistical methods-recursive partitioning and regression-to pinpoint disease susceptibility to the MHC class I genes HLA-B and HLA-A (risk ratios>1.5; P combined =2.01×10 -19 and 2.35×10 -13 , respectively) in addition to the established associations of the MHC class II genes. Other loci with smaller and/or rarer effects might also be involved, but to find these, future searches must take into account both the HLA class II and class I genes and use even larger samples. Taken together with previous

The main problems in drawing causal inferences from epidemiological case-control studies are confounding by unmeasured extraneous factors, selection bias and differential misclassification of exposure. In genetics the first of these, in the form of population structure, has dominated recent debate. Population structure explained part of the significant +11.2% inflation of test statistics we observed in an analysis of 6,322 nonsynonymous SNPs in 816 cases of type 1 diabetes and 877 population-based controls from Great Britain. The remainder of the inflation resulted from differential bias in genotype scoring between case and control DNA samples, which originated from two laboratories, causing false-positive associations. To avoid excluding SNPs and losing valuable information, we extended the genomic control method by applying a variable downweighting to each SNP.