MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199436224 · doi:10.1002/hep4.1805

Genome‐Wide Association Study of NAFLD Using Electronic Health Records

2021· review· en· W3199436224 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron J. Fairfield, Thomas M Drake, Riinu Pius, Andrew D. Bretherick, Archie Campbell, David W. Clark, Jonathan Fallowfield, Caroline Hayward, Neil C. Henderson, Peter K. Joshi, Nicholas L. Mills, David J. Porteous, Prakash Ramachandran, Robert K. Semple, Catherine A. Shaw, Cathie Sudlow, Paul R. H. J. Timmers, James F. Wilson, Stephen J. Wigmore, Ewen M. Harrison, Athina Spiliopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology Communications · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
FundersMedical Research CouncilChief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care DirectorateWellcome TrustBritish Heart FoundationAcademy of Medical SciencesScottish GovernmentScottish Funding Council
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyOdds ratioNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseApolipoprotein EGenetic associationGeneticsAlleleInternal medicineGenotypeFatty liverGenotypingBiologyBody mass indexMedicineBioinformaticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismDiseaseGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) have identified several risk loci for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Previous studies have largely relied on small sample sizes and have assessed quantitative traits. We performed a case‐control GWAS in the UK Biobank using recorded diagnosis of NAFLD based on diagnostic codes recommended in recent consensus guidelines. We performed a GWAS of 4,761 cases of NAFLD and 373,227 healthy controls without evidence of NAFLD. Sensitivity analyses were performed excluding other co‐existing hepatic pathology, adjusting for body mass index (BMI) and adjusting for alcohol intake. A total of 9,723,654 variants were assessed by logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, genetic principal components, and genotyping batch. We performed a GWAS meta‐analysis using available summary association statistics. Six risk loci were identified ( P < 5*10 −8 ) (apolipoprotein E [ APOE ], patatin‐like phospholipase domain containing 3 [ PNPLA3 , transmembrane 6 superfamily member 2 [ TM6SF2 ], glucokinase regulator [ GCKR ], mitochondrial amidoxime reducing component 1 [ MARC1 ], and tribbles pseudokinase 1 [ TRIB1 ]). All loci retained significance in sensitivity analyses without co‐existent hepatic pathology and after adjustment for BMI. PNPLA3 and TM6SF2 remained significant after adjustment for alcohol (alcohol intake was known in only 158,388 individuals), with others demonstrating consistent direction and magnitude of effect. All six loci were significant on meta‐analysis. Rs429358 ( P = 2.17*10 −11 ) is a missense variant within the APOE gene determining ϵ4 versus ϵ2/ϵ3 alleles. The ϵ4 allele of APOE offered protection against NAFLD (odds ratio for heterozygotes 0.84 [95% confidence interval 0.78‐0.90] and homozygotes 0.64 [0.50‐0.79]). Conclusion: This GWAS replicates six known NAFLD‐susceptibility loci and confirms that the ϵ4 allele of APOE is associated with protection against NAFLD. The results are consistent with published GWAS using histological and radiological measures of NAFLD, confirming that NAFLD identified through diagnostic codes from consensus guidelines is a valid alternative to more invasive and costly approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatology CommunicationsSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207