MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099373794 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001307

Association between Common Variation at the FTO Locus and Changes in Body Mass Index from Infancy to Late Childhood: The Complex Nature of Genetic Association through Growth and Development

2011· article· en· W2099373794 on OpenAlexafffund
Ulla Sovio, Dennis O. Mook‐Kanamori, Nicole M. Warrington, Robert Lawrence, Laurent Briollais, Joanne E. Cecil, Johanna K. Sandling, Ann‐Christine Syvänen, Marika Kaakinen, Iona Y. Millwood, Amanda J. Bennett, Jaana Laitinen, Anneli Pouta, John Molitor, George Davey Smith, Yoav Ben‐Shlomo, Vincent W. V. Jaddoe, Lyle J. Palmer, Craig E. Pennell, Tim Cole, Mark I. McCarthy, Marjo‐Riitta Järvelin, Nicholas J. Timpson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Genetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMedical Research CouncilDiabetes UKCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthErasmus Universiteit RotterdamWellcome TrustCancer Research UKBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilZonMwRaine Medical Research FoundationBritish Lung FoundationErasmus Medisch CentrumUniversity of BristolBiocenter, University of OuluOulun YliopistoEuropean CommissionVetenskapsrådetNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAcademy of FinlandWomen and Infants Research FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsBody mass indexAlleleMinor allele frequencyLocus (genetics)GenotypeFTO geneDemographyBiologyObesityInternal medicineGeneticsEndocrinologyAllele frequencyMedicinePolymorphism (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An age-dependent association between variation at the FTO locus and BMI in children has been suggested. We meta-analyzed associations between the FTO locus (rs9939609) and BMI in samples, aged from early infancy to 13 years, from 8 cohorts of European ancestry. We found a positive association between additional minor (A) alleles and BMI from 5.5 years onwards, but an inverse association below age 2.5 years. Modelling median BMI curves for each genotype using the LMS method, we found that carriers of minor alleles showed lower BMI in infancy, earlier adiposity rebound (AR), and higher BMI later in childhood. Differences by allele were consistent with two independent processes: earlier AR equivalent to accelerating developmental age by 2.37% (95% CI 1.87, 2.87, p = 10(-20)) per A allele and a positive age by genotype interaction such that BMI increased faster with age (p = 10(-23)). We also fitted a linear mixed effects model to relate genotype to the BMI curve inflection points adiposity peak (AP) in infancy and AR. Carriage of two minor alleles at rs9939609 was associated with lower BMI at AP (-0.40% (95% CI: -0.74, -0.06), p = 0.02), higher BMI at AR (0.93% (95% CI: 0.22, 1.64), p = 0.01), and earlier AR (-4.72% (-5.81, -3.63), p = 10(-17)), supporting cross-sectional results. Overall, we confirm the expected association between variation at rs9939609 and BMI in childhood, but only after an inverse association between the same variant and BMI in infancy. Patterns are consistent with a shift on the developmental scale, which is reflected in association with the timing of AR rather than just a global increase in BMI. Results provide important information about longitudinal gene effects and about the role of FTO in adiposity. The associated shifts in developmental timing have clinical importance with respect to known relationships between AR and both later-life BMI and metabolic disease risk.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations193
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS GeneticsSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207