MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 048: Association Analyses of up to ∼263,000 Individuals Provide New Insights into the Biology and Genetic Architecture of the Extremes of Anthropometric Traits

2012· article· en· W37255443 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Ingelsson, Reedik Mägi, Stefan Gustafsson, Andrea Ganna, Eleanor Wheeler, André Scherag, Mary F. Feitosa, David Meyre, Kari E. North, Cecilia M. Lindgren, Andrew P. Morris, Elizabeth K. Speliotes, Ruth J. F. Loos, Mark I. McCarthy, Sonja I. Berndt

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic architectureOverweightHeritabilityGenome-wide association studyObesityBody mass indexGeneticsAnthropometryBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismPopulationGenetic associationQuantitative trait locusMedicineInternal medicineGenotypeGeneEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropometric traits have a strong genetic component with heritability estimates between 40–70% for body mass index (BMI) and ∼80% for height; however, established loci only account for a small fraction (1–10%) of the phenotypic variance of these complex traits. It has been hypothesized that the extremes of the distributions of these traits are enriched for genetic loci and may have a distinct genetic architecture compared to the general population. To explore the genetic contribution of the extremes (defined as the upper and lower 5th percentile) of BMI, height, and waist-hip ratio [WHR] adjusted for BMI and clinical classes of obesity (including overweight and obesity classes I, II, and III), we conducted meta-analyses of ∼2.8 million SNPs from 49 genome-wide association studies of European ancestry totaling from 4,774 cases and 5,481 controls (extreme WHR) to 93,015 cases and 65,840 controls (overweight) for these traits. The most promising loci from each meta-analysis (P<5 x 10 −6 ) were taken forward for replication into up to 65,332 cases and 39,294 controls. In meta-analyses of the combined stages, we observed genome-wide significant associations (P<5 x 10 −8 ) for 191 loci (extreme BMI, height and WHR: 10, 96 and 2 loci, respectively; overweight and obesity classes I, II, and III: 25, 33, 24 and 1 loci, respectively). Out of these 191 loci, we identified 9 novel loci that have not been previously associated with anthropometric traits when studying the whole distributions (P<5 x 10 −8 ), including three loci for extreme height ( ZNF36, H6PD , RSRC1 ), three for obesity class II ( OLFM4 , HS6ST3 , AK5/ZZZ3 ), two for obesity class I ( GNAI3/MIR197/GNAT2, HNF4G ), and two for overweight ( RPTOR, HNF4G ). Several loci for obesity were located near genes expressed primarily in the brain (e.g. CACNA1D, AK5 ), suggesting a neuronal influence, whereas the loci for overweight were near genes involved in other processes, such as mTOR signaling (e.g. RPTOR ). All of the novel loci discovered for the extremes and obesity classes were nominally associated with the trait as a continuous measure in the general population (N = 123,865) but at a lesser significance level (P range: 0.003 – 1.4x10 −5 ). A polygenetic risk score including all independent SNPs associated with BMI (at different P-value thresholds) revealed that significantly more of the variance was explained for the extremes of BMI and obesity class II, than for BMI as a continuous measure in the population (variance explained, 20%, 10% and 5%, respectively), suggesting a greater genetic influence on the extremes. Investigations are underway to evaluate haplotypes and additional signals at known BMI and height loci in the extreme samples to explore allelic heterogeneity. In conclusion, this study identifies additional loci and provides novel insights into the genetic architecture of the extremes of anthropometric traits.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207