Identification of Novel Causal Blood Biomarkers Linking Metabolically Favorable Adiposity With Type 2 Diabetes Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Observations of a metabolically unhealthy normal weight phenotype suggest that a lack of favorable adiposity contributes to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to identify causal blood biomarkers linking favorable adiposity with type 2 diabetes risk for use in cardiometabolic risk assessments. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A weighted polygenic risk score (PRS) underpinning metabolically favorable adiposity was validated in the UK Biobank (n = 341,872) and the Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN Trial) (n = 8,197) and tested for association with 238 blood biomarkers. Associated biomarkers were investigated for causation with type 2 diabetes risk using Mendelian randomization and for its performance in predictive models for incident major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RESULTS Of the 238 biomarkers tested, only insulin-like growth factor–binding protein (IGFBP)-3 concentration was associated with the PRS, where a 1 unit increase in PRS predicted a 0.28-SD decrease in IGFBP-3 blood levels (P < 0.05/238). Higher IGFBP-3 levels causally increased type 2 diabetes risk (odds ratio 1.26 per 1 SD genetically determined IGFBP-3 level [95% CI 1.11–1.43]) and predicted a higher incidence of MACE (hazard ratio 1.13 per 1 SD IGFBP-3 concentration [95% CI 1.07–1.20]). Adding IGFBP-3 concentrations to the standard clinical assessment of metabolic health enhanced the prediction of incident MACE, with a net reclassification improvement of 11.5% in normal weight individuals (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS We identified IGFBP-3 as a novel biomarker linking a lack of favorable adiposity with type 2 diabetes risk and a predictive marker for incident cardiovascular events. Using IGFBP-3 blood concentrations may improve the risk assessment of cardiometabolic diseases.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".