Trans Fatty Acid Biomarkers and Incident Type 2 Diabetes: Pooled Analysis from 10 Prospective Cohort Studies in the Fatty Acids and Outcome Research Consortium (FORCE) (OR33-02-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess prospective association between circulating biomarkers of individual trans fatty acids (TFAs) and incident type 2 diabetes (T2D) in diverse populations. A harmonized analysis of individual level data was conducted for TFA biomarkers and incident T2D by pooling ten prospective cohort or nested-case-control studies from five countries (Australia, Germany, Iceland, UK, and USA). Fatty acids (FAs) were measured in plasma phospholipid, red blood cell membrane phospholipid, or total plasma collected between 1990–2008 from 22,711 participants aged ≥18 years without prevalent diabetes. Evaluated TFAs included trans-16:1n-9, sum of trans-18:1 isomers (trans-18:1n6 to trans-18:1n12), sum of trans-18:2 isomers (cis/trans-18:2, trans/cis-18:2, trans/trans-18:2), and individual trans-18:2 isomers. The multivariable-adjusted relative risk or odds ratio was estimated in each cohort by lipid compartments using a pre-specified protocol for definitions of exposures, covariates, and outcomes for statistical analysis. Association estimates were pooled using fixed-effects inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis. During an average maximum of 14 years of follow-up, 2244 cases of incident T2D were identified. Median levels of TFAs across cohorts were 0.05–0.18% total FAs for trans-16:1n-9, 0.09–2.05% for total trans-18:1, 0.10–0.73% for total trans-18:2, and 0.01–0.36% for individual trans-18:2 isomers. In overall pooled analysis, TFAs evaluated per inter-quintile range were not significantly associated with risk of T2D (Figure 1). Findings were consistent when TFAs were assessed categorically in study specific-quintiles, and when associations were pooled within lipid compartment (i.e., phospholipids vs. total plasma). Overall, biomarker levels of TFAs were not significantly associated with risk of incident T2D in this international pooling project. Findings may be due to mixed TFA sources (industrial vs. ruminant), a general decline in TFA exposure during this period, or no effect of circulating TFA on diabetes. Associations of TFA biomarkers with T2D at higher exposures should be investigated. See Table 1.
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 | 0.020 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".