Genetic associations in community context: a mixed model approach identifies a functional variant in the RBP4 gene associated with HDL-C dyslipidemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine individual and community factors that influence high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) dyslipidemia in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), a genetically isolated population in Canada with a high prevalence of HDL-C dyslipidemia. METHODS: First, a group of single nucleotide polymorphisms from 10 metabolic trait candidate genes was tested using a multivariate logistic regression model. The significant SNPs were entered into the second phase, where a mixed logistic model incorporated the community disease risk factors together with the individual factors as the fixed part of the model and the geographic region as a random effect. RESULTS: Analysis of 1489 subjects (26.9% HDL-C dyslipidemia) identified rs3758539, a non-coding variant in the 5'UTR of RBP4, to be associated with HDL-C dyslipidemia (odds ratio = 1.45, 95% confidence interval = 1.08-1.97, p = 0.01). The association remained significant, and the effect size did not change after the incorporation of individual and community risk factors from 17 geographic regions (odds ratio: 1.41, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.93, p = 0.03) in NL. Besides this variant, sex, BMI, and smoking also showed significant associations with HDL-C dyslipidemia, whereas no role was identified for the community factors. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the use of community-level data in a genetic association testing. It reports a functional variant in the promoter of RBP4, a gene directly involved in lipoprotein metabolism, to be associated with HDL-C dyslipidemia. These findings indicate that individual factors are the main reason for a higher prevalence of HDL-C dyslipidemia in the NL population.
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 | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".