Low-frequency Coding Variants Associated With Body Mass Index Affect the Success of Bariatric Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: A recent study identified 14 low-frequency coding variants associated with body mass index (BMI) in 718 734 individuals predominantly of European ancestry. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the association of 2 genetic scores (GS) with i) the risk of severe/morbid obesity, ii) BMI variation before weight-loss intervention, iii) BMI change in response to an 18-month lifestyle/behavioral intervention program, and iv) BMI change up to 24 months after bariatric surgery. METHODS: The 14 low-frequency coding variants were genotyped or sequenced in 342 French adults with severe/morbid obesity and 574 French adult controls from the general population. We built risk and protective GS based on 6 BMI-increasing and 5 BMI-decreasing low-frequency coding variants that were polymorphic in our study. RESULTS: While the risk GS was not associated with severe/morbid obesity status, BMI-decreasing low-frequency coding variants were significantly less frequent in patients with severe/morbid obesity than in French adults from the general population. Neither the risk nor the protective GS was associated with BMI before intervention in patients with severe/morbid obesity, nor did they affect BMI change in response to a lifestyle/behavioral modification program. The protective GS was associated with a greater BMI decrease following bariatric surgery. The risk and protective GS were associated with a higher and lower risk of BMI regain after bariatric surgery. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that in populations of European descent, low-frequency coding variants associated with BMI in the general population also affect the outcomes of bariatric surgery in patients with severe/morbid obesity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".