MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Associations between USF1 gene variants and cardiovascular risk factors in the Quebec Family Study

2007· article· en· W2104214310 on OpenAlexafffundabout
AC Choquette, Luigi Bouchard, Alain Houde, Claude Bouchard, Louis Përusse

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité Laval
KeywordsGeneticsGeneGenotypeApolipoprotein BExonBiologyInternal medicineIntronEndocrinologyMedicineCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular (CVD) risk factors are under the influence of environmental and genetic factors. Human upstream transcription factor 1 gene (USF1) encodes for a transcription factor, which modulates the expression of genes involved in lipid and carbohydrate metabolic pathways. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that USF1 gene variants are associated with CVD risk factors in the Quebec Family Study (QFS). USF1 has been sequenced in 20 QFS subjects with high plasma apolipoprotein B100 (APOB) levels (>1.14 g/l) and small, dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles (> or =250.7 Angstroms and < or =255.9 Angstroms), as well as in five subjects with larger LDL particles. Ten variants were identified in non-coding regions of USF1. Two of these polymorphisms (intron 7 c.561-100 G>A, and exon 11 c.*187 C>T) as well as the c.-56 A>G polymorphism, were genotyped and analyzed in 760 subjects from QFS. Association studies showed that women with c.561-100 A/A and c.*187 T/T genotypes had more favorable adiposity indices (<0.04). In summary, significant associations between relatively common USF1 genetic variants and CVD risk factors were observed in French Canadians.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GeneticsSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207