Hemostatic Factors, APOL1 Risk Variants, and the Risk of ESRD in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hemostatic factors have been associated with kidney function decline, and evidence suggests stronger effects among African Americans. The presence of APOL1 renal risk variants, common in African Americans, might partly underlie this risk difference. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A total of 13,337 participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study were followed from 1987-1989 until 2010. Participants were categorized into three groups by ancestry and APOL1 risk status: European Americans (n=10,206), African Americans with zero or one APOL1 risk allele (n=2,733), and African Americans with two APOL1 risk alleles (n=398). ESRD events were ascertained through linkage to the US Renal Data System. Cox regression was used to estimate the risk for ESRD associated with hemostatic factors (factor VIIc, factor VIIIc, fibrinogen, von Willebrand factor, protein C, and antithrombin III). RESULTS: There were 232 cases of ESRD over 21.5 years (European Americans, 119; African Americans with zero or one APOL1 risk allele, 94; African Americans with two APOL1 risk alleles, 19). In unadjusted and adjusted analysis of the overall population, higher levels of all hemostatic factors, except antithrombin III, were significantly associated with ESRD (all P<0.05). Factor VIIc had the strongest association (per one interquartile range; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.76). With the exception of fibrinogen, the risk associated with each hemostatic factor was stronger in African Americans with two APOL1 risk alleles compared with the other two groups. Statistically significant interactions were seen for factor VIIIc and protein C (interaction between those with two APOL1 risk allele and the other two groups: P<0.02 for factor VIIIc and <0.04 for protein C). CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of factor VIIc, VIIIc, fibrinogen, von Willebrand factor, and protein C were associated with ESRD risk, with a significantly stronger association of factor VIIIc and protein C in African Americans with two APOL1 risk alleles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".