Association of <i>ADIPOQ</i>, <i>LEP</i>, and <i>FTO</i> gene polymorphisms with large for gestational age infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of the ADIPOQ rs2241766, LEP rs7799039, and FTO rs9939609 polymorphisms on the birth weight status of Brazilian infants. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in southern Brazil. Large for gestational age (LGA) newborns (n = 105), and the same number of small for gestational age/adequate for gestational age newborns, were included. Genotyping of the rs2241766, rs7799039, and rs9939609 polymorphisms was done by PCR-RFLP analysis. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association between LGA newborns and the presence of the polymorphisms. RESULTS: Infants carrying the GG genotype of the rs7799039 polymorphism were 2.12 times more likely to be born LGA than those carrying the GA + AA genotypes (95% CI: 1.17-3.83). These results did not change substantially after adjusting for potential confounding variables (OR = 1.98; 95% CI 1.05-3.73) and adjustment for the three polymorphisms (OR = 1.98; 95% CI 1.05-3.74). Regarding the ADIPOQ polymorphism, newborns carrying the TG or GG genotype were 1.88 times more likely to be born LGA than those carrying the TT genotype, although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.082). No association was found between the FTO gene polymorphism and newborn weight status. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the GG genotype of the LEP polymorphism rs7799039 is a risk factor for LGA infants. The exact role and mechanism of action of the GG genotype of this polymorphism in weight status control remain to be elucidated, and more studies are needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".