MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109770394 · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2014.231365

Refinement of Variant Selection for the LDL Cholesterol Genetic Risk Score in the Diagnosis of the Polygenic Form of Clinical Familial Hypercholesterolemia and Replication in Samples from 6 Countries

2014· article· en· W2109770394 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Futema, Sonia Shah, Jackie Cooper, KaWah Li, Ros Whittall, Mahtab Sharifi, Olivia Goldberg, Euridiki Drogari, Vasiliki Mollaki, Albert Wiegman, Joep C. Defesche, Maria D’Agostino, Antonietta D’Angelo, Paolo Rubba, Giuliana Fortunato, Małgorzata Waluś‐Miarka, Robert A. Hegele, Mary A. Bamimore, Ronen Durst, Eran Leitersdorf, Monique Mulder, Jeanine E. Roeters van Lennep, Eric J.G. Sijbrands, John C. Whittaker, Philippa J. Talmud, Steve E. Humphries

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityDepartment of Health Research, IndiaNational Institutes of HealthAthens University of Economics and BusinessHealth and Safety ExecutiveUniversity College LondonBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAgency for Health Care Policy and ResearchMedical Research CouncilJohn D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSNPFamilial hypercholesterolemiaApolipoprotein BGeneticsPCSK9BiologyAlleleAllele frequencyLDL receptorInternal medicineMedicineGenotypeCholesterolLipoproteinGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an autosomal-dominant disorder caused by mutations in 1 of 3 genes. In the 60% of patients who are mutation negative, we have recently shown that the clinical phenotype can be associated with an accumulation of common small-effect LDL cholesterol (LDL-C)-raising alleles by use of a 12-single nucleotide polymorphism (12-SNP) score. The aims of the study were to improve the selection of SNPs and replicate the results in additional samples. METHODS: We used ROC curves to determine the optimum number of LDL-C SNPs. For replication analysis, we genotyped patients with a clinical diagnosis of FH from 6 countries for 6 LDL-C-associated alleles. We compared the weighted SNP score among patients with no confirmed mutation (FH/M-), those with a mutation (FH/M+), and controls from a UK population sample (WHII). RESULTS: Increasing the number of SNPs to 33 did not improve the ability of the score to discriminate between FH/M- and controls, whereas sequential removal of SNPs with smaller effects/lower frequency showed that a weighted score of 6 SNPs performed as well as the 12-SNP score. Metaanalysis of the weighted 6-SNP score, on the basis of polymorphisms in CELSR2 (cadherin, EGF LAG 7-pass G-type receptor 2), APOB (apolipoprotein B), ABCG5/8 [ATP-binding cassette, sub-family G (WHITE), member 5/8], LDLR (low density lipoprotein receptor), and APOE (apolipoprotein E) loci, in the independent FH/M- cohorts showed a consistently higher score in comparison to the WHII population (P < 2.2 × 10(-16)). Modeling in individuals with a 6-SNP score in the top three-fourths of the score distribution indicated a >95% likelihood of a polygenic explanation of their increased LDL-C. CONCLUSIONS: A 6-SNP LDL-C score consistently distinguishes FH/M- patients from healthy individuals. The hypercholesterolemia in 88% of mutation-negative patients is likely to have a polygenic basis.

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)0.101
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1010.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations212
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ChemistrySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207