Replication Analysis for Severe Diabetic Retinopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to attempt to replicate the top single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associations from a previous genome-wide association study (GWAS) for the sight-threatening complications of diabetic retinopathy in an independent cohort of diabetic subjects from the Wisconsin Epidemiologic Study of Diabetic Retinopathy (WESDR). METHODS: This study included 469 type 1 diabetic, Caucasian subjects from WESDR. Cases (n = 208) were defined by prior laser treatment for either proliferative diabetic retinopathy or diabetic macular edema. Controls (n = 261) were all other subjects in the cohort. Three hundred eighty-nine SNPs were tested for association using the Illumina GoldenGate custom array. A retinopathy-only subanalysis was conducted in 437 subjects by removing those with end-stage renal disease. Evaluation for association between cases and controls was conducted by using chi-square tests. A combined analysis incorporated the results from WESDR with the prior GWAS. RESULTS: No associations were significant at a genome-wide level. The analysis did identify SNPs that can be pursued in future replication studies. The top association was at rs4865047, an intronic SNP, in the gene CEP135 (P value 2.06 × 10(-5)). The top association from the subanalysis was at rs1902491 (P value 2.81 × 10(-5)), a SNP that sits upstream of the gene NPY2R. CONCLUSIONS: This study nominates several novel genetic loci that may be associated with severe diabetic retinopathy. In order to confirm these findings, replication and extension in additional cohorts will be necessary as susceptibility alleles for diabetic retinopathy appear to be of modest effect.
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 | 0.029 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".