Large-Scale Gene-Centric Meta-analysis across 32 Studies Identifies Multiple Lipid Loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified many SNPs underlying variations in plasma-lipid levels. We explore whether additional loci associated with plasma-lipid phenotypes, such as high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TGs), can be identified by a dense gene-centric approach. Our meta-analysis of 32 studies in 66,240 individuals of European ancestry was based on the custom ∼50,000 SNP genotyping array (the ITMAT-Broad-CARe array) covering ∼2,000 candidate genes. SNP-lipid associations were replicated either in a cohort comprising an additional 24,736 samples or within the Global Lipid Genetic Consortium. We identified four, six, ten, and four unreported SNPs in established lipid genes for HDL-C, LDL-C, TC, and TGs, respectively. We also identified several lipid-related SNPs in previously unreported genes: DGAT2, HCAR2, GPIHBP1, PPARG, and FTO for HDL-C; SOCS3, APOH, SPTY2D1, BRCA2, and VLDLR for LDL-C; SOCS3, UGT1A1, BRCA2, UBE3B, FCGR2A, CHUK, and INSIG2 for TC; and SERPINF2, C4B, GCK, GATA4, INSR, and LPAL2 for TGs. The proportion of explained phenotypic variance in the subset of studies providing individual-level data was 9.9% for HDL-C, 9.5% for LDL-C, 10.3% for TC, and 8.0% for TGs. This large meta-analysis of lipid phenotypes with the use of a dense gene-centric approach identified multiple SNPs not previously described in established lipid genes and several previously unknown loci. The explained phenotypic variance from this approach was comparable to that from a meta-analysis of GWAS data, suggesting that a focused genotyping approach can further increase the understanding of heritability of plasma lipids.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".