Different impact of deletion polymorphism of gene on the risk of renal and coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: An increased frequency of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) D variant has recently been reported in patients with atheromatous renal artery disease (RAD), whereas controversy exists on the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) associated with this polymorphism. In spite of the frequent coexistence of RAD and CAD, no studies have specifically compared ACE insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism in patients with coronary versus renal artery disease or defined the risk of each disease associated with the D variant. DESIGN: We designed a large case-control study of subjects for whom objective renal or coronary angiographic documentation was available. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed ACE I/D genotype and clinical-biochemical data of a total of 942 subjects (123 patients with and 137 without angiographic evidence of RAD, 420 patients with and 262 without angiographic evidence of CAD). Renal (with and without RAD) and coronary patients were similar for most conventional risk factors. There was no difference in DD frequency between CAD and CAD-free patients (38.1 versus 33.6%, NS) and DD homozygosity was not associated with CAD risk (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 0.82-1.98). In contrast, the DD genotype was more frequent in RAD than in RAD-free patients (54.5 versus 39.4, P < 0.05) and was associated with a 2.25-fold increased risk of RAD in both the univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Additional predictors of RAD were age and creatinine. In RAD/RAD-free patients with angiographically documented CAD, DD homozygosity was confirmed to be preferentially associated with RAD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ACE D variant is preferentially associated with atherosclerotic renal rather than with coronary disease, despite similar exposure to atherogenic noxae. DD homozygosity confers a 2.25-fold increased risk of RAD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".