MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217747882 · doi:10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.9924

Abstract 9924: Polygenic Risk Score for PR Interval is Associated with Increased Risk of Ischemic Stroke

2021· article· en· W3217747882 on OpenAlexaff
Huichun Xu, John W. Cole, Brady Gaynor, Kathy L. Ryan, Braxton D. Mitchell, Tatjana Rundek, Bradford B. Worrall, Patrick T. Ellinor, Diane Fatkin, Steven A. Lubitz, Gui Pare, Dana Leifer

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Ischemic strokeInternal medicineCardiologyPolygenic risk scoreFramingham Risk ScoreConfidence intervalStroke riskIschemiaDiseaseGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial cardiomyopathy (AC) is an emerging risk factor for ischemic stroke (IS). We used polygenic risk scores (PRS) to study the association of the PR interval (PRI)-- an ECG marker for AC-- with IS and IS subtypes. We studied PRI, rather than other AC traits, because a validated multi-ethnic PRI-PRS exists. Methods: We calculated PRI-PRS for patients in the NINDS Stroke Genetics Network (SiGN) database, which contains well-characterized stroke patients and in which we have found an association of a PRS for atrial fibrillation with IS subtypes. We derived PRS for 10 GWAS thresholds after a clumping procedure to eliminate SNPs in linkage disequilibrium. SNPs were weighted by their beta coefficients from the GWAS summary statistics to generate PRS. We normalized by the number of SNPs included. We used logistic regression to compare PRI-PRS in stroke cases (n=13930) and non-stroke controls (n=49473). We controlled for sex and the first 10 principal components of genetic ancestry. We stratified by genetic ancestry and genotype platforms. Logistic regression analyses for each stratum were meta-analyzed using an inverse-variance weighting-based method, assuming fixed effects. Results and Conclusions: In the overall meta-analysis, PRI-PRS was weakly associated with increased risk of IS (p<0.02, only for one GWAS threshold). PRI-PRS was associated with increased risk of IS due to small artery occlusion (SAO) (p=0.032 and 0.033, using GWAS of PRI p-value thresholds 0.05 and 0.005 respectively), but not with other IS subtypes. The SAO association may reflect the association of PRI and hypertension, a risk factor for SAO. In a secondary analysis of European strata, we observed a robust association (p<0.02 across all GWAS thresholds) of the PRI-PRS with all IS in GEOS, which consists of younger onset strokes (age of stroke onset < 50 years). PRI-PRS was also associated in GEOS (p<0.01 across all GWAS thresholds) with the subtype of strokes of undetermined origin, which includes embolic strokes of unknown source (ESUS). PRI-PRS was also associated with large artery strokes at some GWAS thresholds in GEOS. Our results suggest that genetic risk for prolonged PRI is associated with SAO and may have more robust associations with other stroke subtypes in some populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.010
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207