MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070478753 · doi:10.1196/annals.1383.045

HLA–DQA Is Associated with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the Belgian Population

2006· article· en· W2070478753 on OpenAlexaff
Gerard Tromp, Toru Ogata, Lucie Grégoire, Katrina A.B. Goddard, Magdalena Skunca, Wayne D. Lancaster, Antonio Parrado, Qing Lü, Hidenori Shibamura, Natzi Sakalihasan, Raymond Limet, Gerald L. MacKean, Claudette Arthur, Taijiro Sueda, Helena Kuivaniemi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsPathogenesisHuman leukocyte antigenAutoimmunityAlleleImmunologyEtiologyLocus (genetics)MedicinePopulationGeneticsBiologyAntigenPathologyGeneImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic inflammation and autoimmunity likely contribute to the pathogenesis of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The aim of this study was to investigate the role of autoimmunity in the etiology of AAAs using a genetic association study approach with human leukocyte antigen (HLA) polymorphisms (HLA-DQA1, -DQB1, -DRB1 and -DRB3-5 alleles) in 387 AAA cases and 426 controls. We observed an association with the HLA-DQA1 locus among Belgian males, and found a significant difference in the HLA-DQA1*0102 allele frequencies between AAA cases and controls. In conclusion, this study showed potential evidence that the HLA-DQA1 locus harbors a genetic risk factor for AAAs suggesting that autoimmunity plays a role in the pathogenesis of AAAs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicAortic aneurysm repair treatmentsFrench-language works237,207