Polymorphisms in the LPL and CETP Genes and Haplotype in the ESR1 Gene Are Associated with Metabolic Syndrome in Women from Southwestern Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a combination of metabolic disorders associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Studies in women reported associations between polymorphisms in ESR1, LPL and CETP genes and MetS. Our aim was to evaluate the association between variants in ESR1, LPL and CETP genes with MetS and its components. Four hundred and eighty women were analyzed, anthropometric features and biochemical profiles were evaluated, and genotyping was performed by real-time PCR. We found an association with elevated glucose levels (odds ratio (OR) = 2.9; p = 0.013) in carrying the AA genotype of rs1884051 in the ESR1 gene compared with the GG genotype, and the CC genotype of rs328 in the LPL gene was associated with MetS compared to the CG or GG genotype (OR = 2.8; p = 0.04). Moreover, the GA genotype of rs708272 in the CETP gene is associated with MetS compared to the GG or AA genotype (OR = 1.8; p = 0.006). In addition the ACTCCG haplotype in the ESR1 gene is associated with a decrease in the risk of MetS (OR = 0.02; p < 0.001). In conclusion, our results show the involvement of the variants of ESR1, LPL and CETP genes in metabolic events related to MetS or some of its features.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".