Clinically Relevant Circulating Protein Biomarkers for Type 1 Diabetes: Evidence From a Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify circulating proteins influencing type 1 diabetes susceptibility using Mendelian randomization (MR). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a large-scale two-sample MR study, using cis genetic determinants (protein quantitative trait loci [pQTL]) of up to 1,611 circulating proteins from five large genome-wide association studies, to screen for causal associations of these proteins with type 1 diabetes risk in 9,684 case subjects with type 1 diabetes and 15,743 control subjects. Further, pleiotropy-robust MR methods were used in sensitivity analyses using both cis and trans-pQTL. RESULTS: We found that a genetically predicted SD increase in signal regulatory protein gamma (SIRPG) level was associated with increased risk of type 1 diabetes risk (MR odds ratio [OR] 1.66 [95% 1.36-2.03]; P = 7.1 × 10-7). The risk of type 1 diabetes increased almost twofold per genetically predicted standard deviation (SD) increase in interleukin-27 Epstein-Barr virus-induced 3 (IL27-EBI3) protein levels (MR OR 1.97 [95% CI 1.48-2.62]; P = 3.7 × 10-6). However, an SD increase in chymotrypsinogen B1 (CTRB1) was associated with decreased risk of type 1 diabetes (MR OR 0.84 [95% CI 0.77-0.90]; P = 6.1 × 10-6). Sensitivity analyses using MR methods testing for pleiotropy while including trans-pQTL showed similar results. While the MR-Egger suggested no pleotropic effect (P value MR-Egger intercept = 0.31), there was evidence of pleiotropy in MR-PRESSO (P value global test = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: We identified three novel circulating protein biomarkers associated with type 1 diabetes risk using an MR approach. These biomarkers are promising targets for development of drugs and/or of screening tools for early prediction of type 1 diabetes.
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 | 0.057 | 0.128 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".