APOA5 Gene Polymorphisms and Cardiovascular Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein A5 (APOA5) 1131 is one of the most investigated gene polymorphisms in association with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) for its roles in epigenetics pathways. OBJECTIVES: The major objective of this metaprediction study was to comprehensively examine the association of polymorphism risk subtypes of APOA5 1131 gene and potential contributing factors of CVD risks in global populations. METHODS: This study is a meta-analysis to determine APOA5 gene polymorphisms as risk factors for CVDs. Following the guidelines of meta-analyses, we applied big data analytics including the recursive partition tree, nonlinear association curve fit, and heat maps for data visualization-in addition to the conventional pooled analyses. RESULTS: A total of 17,692 CVD cases and 23,566 controls from 50 study groups were included. The frequency of APOA5 1131 CC and TC polymorphisms in Asian populations (22.2%-52.6%) were higher than that in other populations, including Caucasians and Eurasians (10.0%-25.0%). The homozygous CC and heterozygous TC genotypes (both p < .0001) were associated with increased risks for CVD and were higher in many Western nations, including Canada, Spain, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Turkey, Egypt, France, and Iran. The CC genotype was associated with greater risks (RR > 2.00, p < .0001) for dyslipidemia and myocardial infarction, whereas RR > 1.00 was associated with metabolic syndrome, coronary artery disease, and stroke. Air pollution was significantly associated with APOA5 1131 CC and TC polymorphisms. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study provided novel insight to further understand the associations among APOA5 1131 polymorphisms, air pollution, and the development of CVDs. Methylation studies are needed to examine epigenetic factors associated with APOA5 1131 polymorphisms and CVD and to suggest potential prevention strategies for CVD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".