Integrating epigenetic, genetic, and phenotypic data to uncover gene-region associations with triglycerides in the GOLDN study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been significant interest in investigating genome-wide and epigenome-wide associations with lipids. Testing at the gene or region level may improve power in such studies. METHODS: We analyze chromosome 11 cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) methylation levels and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes from the original Genetics of Lipid Lowering Drugs and Diet Network (GOLDN) study, aiming to explore the association between triglyceride levels and genetic/epigenetic factors. We apply region-based tests of association to methylation and genotype data, in turn, which seek to increase power by reducing the dimension of the gene-region variables. We also investigate whether integrating 2 omics data sets (methylation and genotype) into the triglyceride association analysis helps or hinders detection of candidate gene regions. RESULTS: Gene-region testing identified 1 CpG region that had been previously reported in the GOLDN study data and another 2 gene regions that are also associated with triglyceride levels. Testing on the combined genetic and epigenetic data detected the same genes as using epigenetic or genetic data alone. CONCLUSIONS: Region-based testing can uncover additional association signals beyond those detected using single-variant testing.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".