Role of Adiponectin in Coronary Heart Disease Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Hypoadiponectinemia correlates with several coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors. However, it is unknown whether adiponectin is causally implicated in CHD pathogenesis. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the causal effect of adiponectin on CHD risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: We undertook a Mendelian randomization study using data from genome-wide association studies consortia. We used the ADIPOGen consortium to identify genetic variants that could be used as instrumental variables for the effect of adiponectin. Data on the association of these genetic variants with CHD risk were obtained from CARDIoGRAM (22 233 CHD cases and 64 762 controls of European ancestry) and from CARDIoGRAMplusC4D Metabochip (63 746 cases and 130 681 controls; ≈ 91% of European ancestry) consortia. Data on the association of genetic variants with adiponectin levels and with CHD were combined to estimate the influence of blood adiponectin on CHD risk. In the conservative approach (restricted to using variants within the adiponectin gene as instrumental variables), each 1 U increase in log blood adiponectin concentration was associated with an odds ratio for CHD of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.01) in CARDIoGRAM and 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.12) in CARDIoGRAMplusC4D Metabochip. Findings from the liberal approach (including variants in any locus across the genome) indicated a protective effect of adiponectin that was attenuated to the null after adjustment for known CHD predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our findings do not support a causal role of adiponectin levels in CHD pathogenesis.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".