MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Whole-Genome Sequencing to Characterize Monogenic and Polygenic Contributions in Patients Hospitalized With Early-Onset Myocardial Infarction

2019· article· en· W2901728784 on OpenAlexaff
Amit V. Khera, Mark Chaffin, Seyedeh M. Zekavat, Ryan L. Collins, Carolina Roselli, Pradeep Natarajan, Judith H. Lichtman, Gail D’Onofrio, Jennifer A. Mattera, Rachel P. Dreyer, John A. Spertus, Kent D. Taylor, Bruce M. Psaty, Stephen S. Rich, Wendy S. Post, Namrata Gupta, Stacey Gabriel, Eric S. Lander, Yii‐Der Ida Chen, Michael E. Talkowski, Jerome I. Rotter, Harlan M. Krumholz, Sekar Kathiresan

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Stephen's University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of HealthHarvard CatalystNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteMassachusetts General HospitalNational Institute of General Medical SciencesAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionWhole genome sequencingGenomeGenome-wide association studyGeneticsInternal medicineCardiologyGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The relative prevalence and clinical importance of monogenic mutations related to familial hypercholesterolemia and of high polygenic score (cumulative impact of many common variants) pathways for early-onset myocardial infarction remain uncertain. Whole-genome sequencing enables simultaneous ascertainment of both monogenic mutations and polygenic score for each individual. METHODS: We performed deep-coverage whole-genome sequencing of 2081 patients from 4 racial subgroups hospitalized in the United States with early-onset myocardial infarction (age ≤55 years) recruited with a 2:1 female-to-male enrollment design. We compared these genomes with those of 3761 population-based control subjects. We first identified individuals with a rare, monogenic mutation related to familial hypercholesterolemia. Second, we calculated a recently developed polygenic score of 6.6 million common DNA variants to quantify the cumulative susceptibility conferred by common variants. We defined high polygenic score as the top 5% of the control distribution because this cutoff has previously been shown to confer similar risk to that of familial hypercholesterolemia mutations. RESULTS: The mean age of the 2081 patients presenting with early-onset myocardial infarction was 48 years, and 66% were female. A familial hypercholesterolemia mutation was present in 36 of these patients (1.7%) and was associated with a 3.8-fold (95% CI, 2.1-6.8; P<0.001) increased odds of myocardial infarction. Of the patients with early-onset myocardial infarction, 359 (17.3%) carried a high polygenic score, associated with a 3.7-fold (95% CI, 3.1-4.6; P<0.001) increased odds. Mean estimated untreated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was 206 mg/dL in those with a familial hypercholesterolemia mutation, 132 mg/dL in those with high polygenic score, and 122 mg/dL in those in the remainder of the population. Although associated with increased risk in all racial groups, high polygenic score demonstrated the strongest association in white participants ( P for heterogeneity=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Both familial hypercholesterolemia mutations and high polygenic score are associated with a >3-fold increased odds of early-onset myocardial infarction. However, high polygenic score has a 10-fold higher prevalence among patients presents with early-onset myocardial infarction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00597922.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations332
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207