Genomics of body fat percentage may contribute to sex bias in anorexia nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anorexia nervosa (AN) occurs nine times more often in females than in males. Although environmental factors likely play a role, the reasons for this imbalanced sex ratio remain unresolved. AN displays high genetic correlations with anthropometric and metabolic traits. Given sex differences in body composition, we investigated the possible metabolic underpinnings of female propensity for AN. We conducted sex‐specific GWAS in a healthy and medication‐free subsample of the UK Biobank ( n = 155,961), identifying 77 genome‐wide significant loci associated with body fat percentage (BF%) and 174 with fat‐free mass (FFM). Partitioned heritability analysis showed an enrichment for central nervous tissue‐associated genes for BF%, which was more prominent in females than males. Genetic correlations of BF% and FFM with the largest GWAS of AN by the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium were estimated to explore shared genomics. The genetic correlations of BF% male and BF% female with AN differed significantly from each other ( p < .0001, δ = −0.17), suggesting that the female preponderance in AN may, in part, be explained by sex‐specific anthropometric and metabolic genetic factors increasing liability to AN.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".