Genetic and behavioral modification of hemoglobin and iron status among first‐time and high‐intensity blood donors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some people rapidly develop iron deficiency anemia following blood donation, while others can repeatedly donate without becoming anemic. METHODS: Two cohorts of blood donors were studied. Participants (775) selected from a 2-year longitudinal study were classified into six analysis groups based on sex, donation intensity, and low hemoglobin deferral. Associations with iron supplement use, cigarette smoking, and four genetic variants of iron metabolism were examined at enrollment and with longitudinal regression models. An unbiased assessment of genetic variability and ability to repeatedly donate blood without experiencing low hemoglobin deferral was conducted on participants (13,403) in a cross-sectional study who were examined by genome wide association (GWA). RESULTS: Behaviors and genetic variants were associated with differences in hemoglobin and ferritin change following repeated donation. At least weekly iron supplement use was associated with improved status in first-time donors, while daily use was associated with improved status in high-intensity donors. Cigarette smoking was associated with 0.5 g/dL increased hemoglobin in high-intensity donors. A736V in TMPRSS6 was associated with a rapid drop in hemoglobin and ferritin in first-time females following repeated donation. Conversely, the protective TMPRSS6 genotype was not enriched among high-intensity donors. H63D in HFE was associated with increased hemoglobin in female high-intensity donors. However, no differences in genotype between first-time and high-intensity donors were found in GWA analyses. CONCLUSION: Behavioral and genetic modifiers contributed to first-time donor hemoglobin and iron status, while iron supplement use was more important than underlying genetics in high-intensity donors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".