Genetic landscape of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease identifies heterogeneous cell-type and phenotype associations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the leading cause of respiratory mortality worldwide. Genetic risk loci provide new insights into disease pathogenesis. We performed a genome-wide association study in 35,735 cases and 222,076 controls from the UK Biobank and additional studies from the International COPD Genetics Consortium. We identified 82 loci associated with P < 5 × 10−8; 47 of these were previously described in association with either COPD or population-based measures of lung function. Of the remaining 35 new loci, 13 were associated with lung function in 79,055 individuals from the SpiroMeta consortium. Using gene expression and regulation data, we identified functional enrichment of COPD risk loci in lung tissue, smooth muscle, and several lung cell types. We found 14 COPD loci shared with either asthma or pulmonary fibrosis. COPD genetic risk loci clustered into groups based on associations with quantitative imaging features and comorbidities. Our analyses provide further support for the genetic susceptibility and heterogeneity of COPD. Genome-wide analysis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease identifies 82 loci, 35 of which are new. Integration of gene expression and genomic annotation data shows enrichment of signals in lung tissue, smooth muscle and several lung cell types.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".