Metabolic Traits and Stroke Risk in Individuals of African Ancestry: Mendelian Randomization Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Metabolic traits affect ischemic stroke (IS) risk, but the degree to which this varies across different ethnic ancestries is not known. Our aim was to apply Mendelian randomization to investigate the causal effects of type 2 diabetes (T2D) liability and lipid traits on IS risk in African ancestry individuals, and to compare them to estimates obtained in European ancestry individuals. METHODS: For African ancestry individuals, genetic proxies for T2D liability and circulating lipids were obtained from a meta-analysis of the African Partnership for Chronic Disease Research study, the UK Biobank, and the Million Veteran Program (total N=77 061). Genetic association estimates for IS risk were obtained from the Consortium of Minority Population Genome-Wide Association Studies of Stroke (3734 cases and 18 317 controls). For European ancestry individuals, genetic proxies for the same metabolic traits were obtained from Million Veteran Program (lipids N=297 626, T2D N=148 726 cases, and 965 732 controls), and genetic association estimates for IS risk were obtained from the MEGASTROKE study (34 217 cases and 406 111 controls). Random-effects inverse-variance weighted Mendelian randomization was used as the main method, complemented with sensitivity analyses more robust to pleiotropy. RESULTS: Higher genetically proxied T2D liability, LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), total cholesterol and lower genetically proxied HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) were associated with increased risk of IS in African ancestry individuals (odds ratio per doubling the odds of T2D liability [95% CI], 1.09 [1.07-1.11]; per standard-deviation increase in LDL-C, 1.12 [1.04-1.21]; total cholesterol: 1.23 [1.06-1.43]; HDL-C, 0.93 [0.89-0.99]). There was no evidence for differences in these estimates when performing analyses in European ancestry individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses support a causal effect of T2D liability and lipid traits on IS risk in African ancestry individuals, with Mendelian randomization estimates similar to those obtained in European ancestry individuals.
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 | 0.062 | 0.110 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".