Variation and impact of polygenic hematologic traits in monogenic sickle cell disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several of the complications observed in sickle cell disease (SCD) are influenced by variation in hematologic traits (HT), such as fetal hemoglobin (HbF) level and neutrophil count. Previous large-scale genome-wide association studies carried out in largely healthy individuals have identified thousands of variants associated with HT, which have then been used to develop multi-ancestry polygenic trait scores (PTS). Here, we tested whether these PTS associate with HT in SCD patients and if they can improve statistical models associated with SCD-related complications. In 2,056 SCD patients, we found that the PTS predicted less HT variance than in non-SCD individuals of African ancestry. This was particularly striking at the Duffy/DARC locus, where we observed an epistatic interaction between the SCD genotype and the Duffy null variant (rs2814778) that led to a two-fold weaker effect on neutrophil count. PTS for these HT which are measured as part of routine practice were not associated with complications in SCD. In contrast, we found that a simple PTS for HbF that includes only six variants explained a large fraction of the phenotypic variation (20.5-27.1%), associated with acute chest syndrome and stroke risk, and improved the statistical modeling of the vaso-occlusive crisis rate. Using Mendelian randomization, we found that increasing HbF by 4.8% reduces stroke risk by 39% (P=0.0006). Taken together, our results highlight the importance of validating PTS in large diseased populations before proposing their implementation in the context of precision medicine initiatives.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".