Polygenic risk scores predict diabetic complications and their response to therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Type 2 diabetes increases the risk of cardiovascular and renal complications, but early risk prediction can lead to timely intervention and better outcomes. Through summary statistics of meta-analyses of published genome-wide association studies performed in over 1.2 million of individuals, we combined 9 PRS gathering genomic variants associated to cardiovascular and renal diseases and their key risk factors into one logistic regression model, to predict micro- and macrovascular endpoints of diabetes. Its clinical utility in predicting complications of diabetes was tested in 4098 participants with diabetes of the ADVANCE trial followed during a period of 10 years and replicated it in three independent non-trial cohorts. The prediction model adjusted for ethnicity, sex, age at onset and diabetes duration, identified the top 30% of ADVANCE participants at 3.1-fold increased risk of major micro- and macrovascular events (p=6.3×10 −21 and p=9.6×10 −31 , respectively) and at 4.4-fold (p=6.8×10 −33 ) increased risk of cardiovascular death compared to the remainder of T2D subjects. While in ADVANCE overall, combined intensive therapy of blood pressure and glycaemia decreased cardiovascular mortality by 24%, the prediction model identified a high-risk group in whom this therapy decreased mortality by 47%, and a low risk group in whom the therapy had no discernable effect. Patients with high PRS had the greatest absolute risk reduction with a number needed to treat of 12 to prevent one cardiovascular death over 5 years. This novel polygenic prediction model identified people with diabetes at low and high risk of complications and improved targeting those at greater benefit from intensive therapy while avoiding unnecessary intensification in low-risk subjects.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".