Sex Differences in Blood HDL‐c, the Total Cholesterol/HDL‐c Ratio, and Palmitoleic Acid are Not Associated with Variants in Common Candidate Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Blood lipids are associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Moreover, circulating lipid and fatty acid levels vary between men and women, and evidence demonstrates these traits may be influenced by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Sex‐genotype interactions related to blood lipids and fatty acids have been poorly investigated and may help elucidate sex differences in CVD risk. The goal of this study was to investigate if the influence of SNPs previously associated with blood lipids and fatty acids varies in a sex‐specific manner. Lipids and fatty acids were measured in serum and red blood cells (RBC), respectively, in 94 adults (18–30 years) from the GONE FISHIN’ cohort and 118 age‐matched individuals from the GOLDN cohort. HDL‐c levels were higher and the total cholesterol/HDL‐c (TC/HDL‐c) ratio was lower in women versus men ( p < 0.01). RBC palmitoleic acid and the stearoyl‐CoA desaturase index were both higher in women ( p < 0.01). Fatty acid desaturase (FADS) pathway activity (estimated using the ratio of eicosapentaenoic acid/alpha‐linolenic acid) was higher in men ( p < 0.01). The AA genotype for rs1800775 in CETP had a lower TC/HDL‐c ratio in men, but not women ( p int = 0.03). Independent of sex, major alleles for rs174537 in FADS1 (GG) and rs3211956 in CD36 (TT) had higher arachidonic acid, lower dihomo‐γ‐linoleic acid, and a higher FADS1 activity compared to minor alleles. The current study showed that blood lipid and fatty acid levels vary between healthy young men and women, but that the observed sex differences are not associated with common variants in candidate lipid metabolism genes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".