Genetic risk factors for ischaemic stroke and its subtypes (the METASTROKE Collaboration): a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been done in ischaemic stroke, identifying a few loci associated with the disease, but sample sizes have been 3500 cases or less. We established the METASTROKE collaboration with the aim of validating associations from previous GWAS and identifying novel genetic associations through meta-analysis of GWAS datasets for ischaemic stroke and its subtypes. METHODS: We meta-analysed data from 15 ischaemic stroke cohorts with a total of 12 389 individuals with ischaemic stroke and 62 004 controls, all of European ancestry. For the associations reaching genome-wide significance in METASTROKE, we did a further analysis, conditioning on the lead single nucleotide polymorphism in every associated region. Replication of novel suggestive signals was done in 13 347 cases and 29 083 controls. FINDINGS: We verified previous associations for cardioembolic stroke near PITX2 (p=2·8×10(-16)) and ZFHX3 (p=2·28×10(-8)), and for large-vessel stroke at a 9p21 locus (p=3·32×10(-5)) and HDAC9 (p=2·03×10(-12)). Additionally, we verified that all associations were subtype specific. Conditional analysis in the three regions for which the associations reached genome-wide significance (PITX2, ZFHX3, and HDAC9) indicated that all the signal in each region could be attributed to one risk haplotype. We also identified 12 potentially novel loci at p<5×10(-6). However, we were unable to replicate any of these novel associations in the replication cohort. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that, although genetic variants can be detected in patients with ischaemic stroke when compared with controls, all associations we were able to confirm are specific to a stroke subtype. This finding has two implications. First, to maximise success of genetic studies in ischaemic stroke, detailed stroke subtyping is required. Second, different genetic pathophysiological mechanisms seem to be associated with different stroke subtypes. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council (MRC), Australian National and Medical Health Research Council, National Institutes of Health (NIH) including National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS).
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 | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".