MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098230963 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0902604

Genetic Variants Associated with Lp(a) Lipoprotein Level and Coronary Disease

2009· article· en· W2098230963 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Clarke, John F. Peden, Jemma C. Hopewell, Theodosios Kyriakou, Anuj Goel, Simon Heath, Sarah Parish, Simona Barlera, Maria Grazia Franzosi, Stephan Rust, Derrick Bennett, Angela Silveira, Anders Mälarstig, Fiona R. Green, Mark Lathrop, Bruna Gigante, Karin Leander, Ulf dé Fairé, Udo Seedorf, Anders Hamsten, Rory Collins, Hugh Watkins, Martin Farrall

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
FundersBritish Heart FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsLipoprotein(a)MedicineCoronary artery diseaseLipoproteinRisk factorDiseaseInternal medicineGenetic variantsAtherosclerotic cardiovascular diseaseCardiologyGeneticsCholesterolGeneGenotypeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An increased level of Lp(a) lipoprotein has been identified as a risk factor for coronary artery disease that is highly heritable. The genetic determinants of the Lp(a) lipoprotein level and their relevance for the risk of coronary disease are incompletely understood. METHODS: We used a novel gene chip containing 48,742 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 2100 candidate genes to test for associations in 3145 case subjects with coronary disease and 3352 control subjects. Replication was tested in three independent populations involving 4846 additional case subjects with coronary disease and 4594 control subjects. RESULTS: Three chromosomal regions (6q26-27, 9p21, and 1p13) were strongly associated with the risk of coronary disease. The LPA locus on 6q26-27 encoding Lp(a) lipoprotein had the strongest association. We identified a common variant (rs10455872) at the LPA locus with an odds ratio for coronary disease of 1.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49 to 1.95) and another independent variant (rs3798220) with an odds ratio of 1.92 (95% CI, 1.48 to 2.49). Both variants were strongly associated with an increased level of Lp(a) lipoprotein, a reduced copy number in LPA (which determines the number of kringle IV-type 2 repeats), and a small Lp(a) lipoprotein size. Replication studies confirmed the effects of both variants on the Lp(a) lipoprotein level and the risk of coronary disease. A meta-analysis showed that with a genotype score involving both LPA SNPs, the odds ratios for coronary disease were 1.51 (95% CI, 1.38 to 1.66) for one variant and 2.57 (95% CI, 1.80 to 3.67) for two or more variants. After adjustment for the Lp(a) lipoprotein level, the association between the LPA genotype score and the risk of coronary disease was abolished. CONCLUSIONS: We identified two LPA variants that were strongly associated with both an increased level of Lp(a) lipoprotein and an increased risk of coronary disease. Our findings provide support for a causal role of Lp(a) lipoprotein in coronary disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations1,646
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207